Ground collision YMML - Virgin/Jetstar

[Advs]

Two aircraft apparently made 'contact' while taxiing at Melbourne Airport this morning. No injuries reported.
https://twitter.com/alexwhitelive/status/365991947275481088

[Capt Kremin]

Jetstar, Virgin planes in tarmac bingle at Melbourne Airport (http://www.smh.com.au/travel/travel-incidents/jetstar-virgin-planes-in-tarmac-bingle-at-melbourne-airport-20130810-2roct.html)

Nobody hurt. Not supposed to happen though....!

[Ka6crpe]

She'll be right mate. That'll buff right out. :O

[Capn Bloggs]

The old "holding short of the bay" trick...

Single-man pushback with one of those remote control thingees?

Jetstar load factor http://www.smilies.our-local.co.uk/index_files/thumbsdown3.gif

Virgin Load factor :ok:

:}

[falconx]

Cap'n Bloggs, was actually a tow bar push job

[ozbiggles]

Charter Plane....what Charter plane?

[donkdonk]

A Jetstar statement said its aircraft was stationary when the collision occurred.


Stationary collision, rather unusual...

[Capn Bloggs]

Cap'n Bloggs, was actually a tow bar push job
Rojer Falcon. :ok:

[Going Nowhere]

Stationary collision, rather unusual...

Not really DD,

I guess it's like backing into a parked car? :(

[donkdonk]

Technically a collision needs two moving objects

[seconds]

Some more photos of the damage. Including close up of Jetstar APU

https://www.facebook.com/SecondHandPilot

[DraggieDriver]

Donk, not quite right, one may be stationary wrt your frame of reference, as the stationary object will still exert an equal and opposite force on the moving object, thus both objects will experience a change in their momentum.

col·li·sion [kuh-lizh-uhn]
noun
1. the act of colliding; a coming violently into contact; crash: the collision of two airplanes.
2. a clash; conflict: a collision of purposes.
3. Physics. the meeting of particles or of bodies in which each exerts a force upon the other, causing the exchange of energy or momentum.

[Wally Mk2]

This sort of thing goes on the world over (collision) & where you have humans & machines in the mix it's inevitable. Amazing it's not happening more actually.

Some tea & bickies I'd say:)

As for 'collision'? Well I think we get the gist of things here. ...in a police reportt...........the collision with the tree was of such force that it broke the car in two.

Wmk2

[Lookleft]

Do groundstaff get tea and bickies or do they just get bread and water?

[Mr.Buzzy]

They get promoted to a position with a clipboard and clicky-pen.

Bbbbzzzzzzzz

[greenslopes]

Chickens and Roost springs to mind. No doubt a risk assessment was done and 'statistically, It'll never happen'.
I'd laugh but it's just not funny.

[Capn Bloggs]

No doubt a risk assessment was done and 'statistically, It'll never happen'.
Keh? What'll never happen?

[The Green Goblin]

The Green Goblin, I'll bite
See your from "The Shire", you didn't subsidise you wage as a local on that fantastic reality-drama show of the same name by any chance?

Or possibly a Hobbit with a ring that is precious but has been used by many ....

FFRATS

No, I tutored English.

Would you like some? (Tutoring) :)

[Skystar320]

$3m collision between Virgin and Jetstar planes at Melbourne Airport blamed on cost cutting | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/national-news/victoria/m-collision-between-virgin-and-jetstar-planes-at-melbourne-airport-blamed-on-cost-cutting/story-fnii5sms-1226694679366)

Okay - talk about a fcuk up but what about the journalism?

A380? Come on :ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Zephyrus]

Thats what you get when you have somebody throwing bags one minute and then pushing back an $85 Million Dollar aircraft (that he has no respect for) the next...
Bring back Engineer only pushbacks.

[S70IP]

Love how the airbus ended up in pieces and the Boeing just had a "scratch".
Says a lot.

[S70IP]

Baggage Handler & Push Back Driver
Thats what you get when you have somebody throwing bags one minute and then pushing back an $85 Million Dollar aircraft (that he has no respect for) the next...
Bring back Engineer only pushbacks.

Makes no difference. Humans are humans. There was a incident in Brisbane where a wing tip hit a pole and one in Melbourne where the tow bar broke and the guy guarding the brakes did nothing and tore a hole down the side of the aircraft. Both Engineers.

[ChrisJ800]

Is it me or are virgin winglets getting taller and taller? Are they getting so big as to obstruct ground staff views? :rolleyes::hmm:

[The Bungeyed Bandit]

I'm sure that Boeing require a separation of 50 feet of an aircraft APU exhaust and the wing tip of a moving/towing aircraft due to the wing fuel tank vent/nacca scoop.

[dogebros]

S7OIP,
The incident you mention that happened in Brisbane. The Poll must've been very tall with a very hard head. Was he/she from Krakow?:D

[Eastwest Loco]

I have to agree with Zephyrus.

Airlines these days contract work out to companies that have absolutely no Airline culture, train them to the minima and actually introduce operating systems that mean they don't have to do more than rudimentary instruction.

I have had bag snatchers help on load and trim issues, do the start up, marshall aeroplanes in, handle the phones and computer and they did it magnificently BECAUSE THEY WERE PART OF THE AIRLINE AND THEY WANTED TO HELP!!!

One doesn't pledghe allegience to an Airline that would lose you in a second if they could outsource or automate the job.

However, despite the lack of "rats' arse" in general by the Airlines today, a little duty of care does still apply and a sound butt kicking would be warranted.

Best all

EWL

[Jack Ranga]

You reckon this'll change anything? Insurance will pay for it, neither of the airlines will give a rats arse ;)

[AEROMEDIC]

That's right, Jack.

This won't change anything about how airlines do business. The legals will be sorted out and the blame game will start and finish with a head kicked.
Get the LAME's back doing this job as this is a prime example of what happens when a skills base is removed from the equation.
It's fortunate that a costly incident such as this is a result of improper gound handling rather than an event in the air.

[The Green Goblin]

Even if both airlines had to pay cash for repairs, the money saved by having contracted rampies doing pushes vs engineers would be absolutely astounding.

Hence why engineers are not doing pushbacks.

The good old days are gone.

[ASY68]

VA have their own rampies doing the domestic side. Now lets have a look here, there are multiple failings here and a bit of the ownership needs to be placed elsewhere.

The aircraft parking conditions are a major factor here, VGR was pulling into D2 and YID was pushing off E1. Now the first thing to look at here is that E1 and D2 can not be clearly seen from either bay due to the new terminal expansion. There is a light that says that an aircraft is pushing however not arriving.

Second issue, ATC had cleared the driver to push once VGR had parked, now I refer back to the last paragraph and the driver, acting under instruction of the ATCO would have trouble seeing VGR and thus should of had the knowledge to separate the clearances.

Third issue, the JQ pilot SHOULD of advised over the GND that they were holding short of the bay due to what ever the cause was. Thus ATC could of canx the clearance for YID and recleared once VGR proceeded to the full stop position.

Fourth issue, not as relevant however the current works on at D6 has played some part to this with the change in pushback procedures.

It's all well and easy to place sole blame on the driver but understand the facts before you got and solely accuse a single party for all issues.

[Capn Bloggs]

ATC had cleared the driver to push once VGR had parked
Does SMC talk directly to the pushback drivers at YMML?

[ASY68]

Because of the works yes.

[Sunfish]

+1 EWL.................

[falconx]

Bloggs everyone but Virgin where it's through the headset

[Old Akro]

ASY68, Thanks for the informative post.

[framer]

no engineer on push back or no wing walkers
Can anyone confirm that there was no Engineer involved in the pushback?
I am dead against removing LAME's from the pushback procedure which is what is happening all around the world now.

[Millet Fanger]

ASY68,
An engineer on a headset, in control of the pushback, takes all of the "factors" that you raise as contributing to the incident into account while carrying out the task at hand.

[bloated goat]

aeroplanes will have to wear safety vests.....

[framer]

It has to be assumed that humans ( tug drivers and ATC, pilots) will make mistakes because they will, guaranteed. With that in mind these fallable Humans need to work within ' error tolerant systems'.
Who is responsible for the systems?
Not the people operationally involved.
It would surprises me if the ethos driving the move towards replacing Engineers on pushback ( a change to the system) wasn't the same ethos that meant the Jetstar aircraft had to hold short of the gate. ie we can reduce staff numbers and get more work out of people and therefore be more efficient.
So in my mind these decisions to make the system less error tolerent are the greatest concern or causal factor.
Someone mentioned Insurance companies. If they refuse to pay out it might make the KPI chasers sit up a bit.
Framer
Ps I am not suggesting that operational staff aren't responsible for doing their job properly, just pointing out that it goes deeper than the ramp environment.

[Oakape]

I would imagine that ATC cleared Virgin to push once the Jetstar A320 was on the bay, which would have been relayed from the flight deck to the guy on the headset. I doubt that the guy on the headset would have been able to see the tarmac markings from where he was & probably couldn't see the NIGS as well, so assumed that the 320 was on position when it stopped.

If there was no wing-walker, it would be difficult to judge the clearance at the wingtip. From the flight deck it often looks awfully close, so it would be the same for him. He possibly assumed that the wingtip was clear even though it looked close, because he thought that the 320 was on the bay. No excuse, but when the picture often looks like that & on time performance is heavily pushed by management, people just tend to rely on past experience, rather than double checking.

I would not be surprised to find that the major problem here is that the 320 didn't advise ATC that it was holding short of the bay. It has happened a number of times around the world. If they didn't feel that they needed to advise ATC for some reason, the pushback clearance to the 737 should have alerted them to the fact that someone was pushing behind them & then they should have advised ATC. Some seem to think they operate in a vacuum & really need to lift their situational awareness. They need to know where the various bays are around the bay they are going on to & listen to ALL radio transmissions, not just on the ground, but in the air as well.

[feetonthedash]

cheap push backs wing full of fuel hot possibly running APU no excuses what a joke CASA hello hello or are you too busy shutting down GA

[falconx]

Looked today at the screens which has D2 with no NIGS and must be marshalled so if there was no ground staff to Marshall JQ in hence the stand off

[FYSTI]

framer, correct. Trading redundancy for efficiency is simply moving money from one managers pile to another, it doesn't necessarily change the profitability one iota. However, it is possible to get a short term profit bump until the inevitable costly incident occurs.

Insurance may well payout in this case. However, repeated claims would see the premium the insurers change increase. My understanding is insurance companies drove enormous change at Korean Air Lines after the large number of accidents and the Delta audit.

[Keg]

There could be multiple issues here.

1. Was it a domestic VOZ or international? Domestic we pass on instructions to the driver. Internationally it's direct to the driver.

2. How congested was the SMC frequency for the JQ crew to call 'holding short' of the bay? I've had numerous occasions in MEL where I can't get a word in to request taxi (or advise holding short) due to SMC also reading our an airways clearance and so on. It would indeed be a tragedy if this prang was contributed to by lack of ATCOs.

3.Agree with EWL about having your own staff with a perception of having their own 'skin' in the game (or at least the metal owned by 'their' employer). I'd be very interested to see how the training of the pushbackers at VOZ and other sub contracting companies compares with legacy training. Same? Different? Longer? Shorter? HF issues covered? etc.

[waren9]

just glad no one got hurt.

take care of yourselves and your colleagues out there fellas, because all the casa box ticking and company policy and safety manuals that these clowns dream up aren't going to.

let mgmnt worry about the $

[parabellum]

"TheJetstar aircraft was holding about 10 metres short of the gate becauseeither there was no marshaller present or the aero bridge wasn't positioned.

Directlyopposite (behind it) was the Virgin 737. It's gate is a little difficult topush from because the aircraft is up against the wall.

Virginhaven't used Engineers to push out their aircraft using Power Push Units for awhile. They use TA's now. I can't understand how the person operating the PPUon the Virgin aircraft wouldn't have sited the Jetstar aircraft behind him.

Evenso with Jetstar having it's red beacons on the push shouldn't have commencedfor the Virgin aircraft until Jetstar has extinguished his beacons which wouldhave meant he was at the gate and not holding short.

Oneof our other push out drivers was in the tug waiting to push one of ourcustomer's aircraft at the time. He told me that he didn't hear the Virginaircraft call up for his push clearance when the incident happened."

Regarding insurance, the airports insurance cover will also be involved but judging by the amount of damage caused it could well come within the respective airlines excess/deductible.

[Wally Mk2]

I recall a small Apron tower at Tulla years ago atop one of the fingers.
Must have been a good reason for it when they built Tulla & back then it was a country Airport compared to today's disorganized mess.

The new taxiway works for the new pending terminal to the Sth will create chaos so perhaps this little current Mr Meaner is a sign!

Wmk2

[Signature]

Keg;

2. How congested was the SMC frequency for the JQ crew to call 'holding short' of the bay? I've had numerous occasions in MEL where I can't get a word in to request taxi (or advise holding short) due to SMC also reading our an airways clearance and so on. It would indeed be a tragedy if this prang was contributed to by lack of ATCOs.

I arrived at MEL shortly before this happened. Despite rwys 34 and 27 being duty rays, 27 was doing it all. There was huge congestion physically and on SMC. Garuda was doing it's own thing, and taxying wherever they wanted, AirAsia forgot to park, and needed to be pushed 3m back, JitConnect didn't know where they were parked and China Eastern were just happy to be here.

We spent over 20 minutes getting from clear or 27 and onto the bay... It was busy.

[VH-Cheer Up]

Perhaps they could get VicPol down there directing traffic. Like when the lights go out at an intersection in the CBD?

[skol]

Not the cheapest labor syndrome is it?

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Oddly it was last Wed that the ALAEA received a letter from Virgin declaring their intent to reduce the number of Engineers in Mel to make way for more tarmac responsibility to be passed to Ramp staff.

Yes anyone can make a mistake but there are some key differences. No Engineer will push a plane back for at least 4 years and the average one will have over 20 years experience. Rampies can be pushing aircraft out after 6 weeks, for most it is just a job until they find something better or their backs are shot.

This would not have happened if they used Wing Walkers. The requirement for Wing Walkers on congested aprons is outlined in the respective aircraft Maintenance Manuals. Rampies cannot access Maintenance Manuals.

I'm looking forward to my Tues meeting with them.

[framer]

Make sure you mention that they were only a meter or so away from an APU disintegrating and APU fuel lines unloading onto 500degree metal. Maybe remind them of the BA A320 cowl latch cock up a few months back as well. The next thing you know we will have supermarket trolley collectors being head hunted for the job.

[Toruk Macto]

You seem those trolley collectors at work , 200 trolleys together being pushed by one person operating an electric motorized pusher . Usually at speed through automatic doors and between people .

[Bagus]

Every airline wants to save a penny but spend a pound.Maybe ATSB will come out that require marshallers during pushback.

[Yarra]

Human nature at play...

"Engineers" will not guarantee that this type of incident will not happen again as they are as fallible as the next human being....

[Capt Groper]

Cost cutting to reduce manpower,
Low cost airline turn around times,
ATC congestion on frequencies,
JQ crew unannounced holding short,
SMC not aware to caution VOZ,
PB driver in a hurry to go to the next A/C.

It's the day all the holes line up...

[whitebait]

Look I've been a LAME for 20+ years and involved in 1000's of pushbacks. I really think it is down to common sense, if it looks too close - check. I've got nothing against to ground handlers carrying out pushback. I would rather be well paid for my core work...

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Engineers" will not guarantee that this type of incident will not happen again as they are as fallible as the next human being....

You either didn't read or didn't understand my post. You can push the aircraft around at 1 inch an hour and not guarantee a collision. Your chances increase as speed does. An Engineer is in nearly all cases going to be vastly more experienced than a baggage handler and the likelihood of a collision will reduce dramatically. For this function, an Engineer is not as fallible as the next human being.

[Yarra]

ALAEA Sec. Yes I did read and did understand and also take your point on experience. Experience has to start somewhere though and requires a platform of good training. However my point is also correct, human beings are fallible and the industry has a history of where even the best training (perhaps what was missing in this incident?) and experience does not prevent accidents or people not adhering to SOP's, irrespective of how qualified they are in their field.

I recall a case where a LAME in MEL took out the stanchions of what is now the Virgin Domestic Concourse whilst driving a PBT. The building suffered severe structural damage and fortunately no one was physically hurt, some shocked staff and passengers though.The LAME was licensed to drive the equipment, was very experienced in PBT operations, yet ignored SOP's on two counts, the speed limit and the environment of where the machinery was being operated.

Tragically and sometimes fatally, some issues arise where training or precautions are not taken into account or even considered necessary in an airport environment with people assuming that others will not endanger their own lives or of others, as "common sense" will prevail. It doesn't. Common sense is not common with some humans, a human fallibility.

From a staff utilisation perspective, it is rational not to use Engineers, they are simply too expensive for such tasks and I agree with Whitebait. Use them on core functions of their valuable knowledge and qualifications.

[nomorecatering]

You don't have to be a LAME to be a good pushback operator, and I have seen some real pros in action.. But you DO need to have a professional attitude. There are, or used to be at least, some real pros. It's is a skill in its own right to be a good rampie and its a bloody hard job. A10 min a/c walkaround doesn't give you the full experience of being on the ramp for hrs. Its either hot or cold, dry or wet, allways noisy and allways dangerous and on top of that it's physically demanding. Nowdays you have the pressure of the boss wanting things done double quick because you are doing double the flights with half the staff of even a few years ago.

But the one worrying thing is, staff turnover. Its not unusual to talk to a rampie who has 4 months experience and he or she is the most experianced person on the crew.

[sunnySA]

I would not be surprised to find that the major problem here is that the 320 didn't advise ATC that it was holding short of the bay. It has happened a number of times around the world. If they didn't feel that they needed to advise ATC for some reason, the pushback clearance to the 737 should have alerted them to the fact that someone was pushing behind them & then they should have advised ATC.

Four points:
1/. If the push-back of Virgin was given as a conditional clearance then the fact that Jetstar wasn't clear meant that Virgin should have waited/paused/stopped before scrapping paint.
2/. Every day there are aircraft towing to a gate/bay that isn't ready, that is, there is equipment blocking access to the bay.
3/. Every hour aircraft are arriving at gates/bays where the NIGS haven't been configured or the marshaller isn't on-site. Why?
4/. The amount of unnecessary RT on ground frequencies needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency.

[40years]

Around about 1984 'clear pushback' was changed to 'pushback approved'.
The reasons were:
1. ATC has no authority on the apron
2. ICAO did it that way
3. ATC could no longer see all the apron area.
The 'Approval' is for the aircraft to push in order to access the taxiway, not to pushback because it is clear behind. Separation on the apron is the responsibility of the wing-walkers, tugs etc. Over the years ATC has bought in by providing ad-hoc traffic information, but no clearance exists, or is permissible.

[Capn Bloggs]

ATC has no authority on the apron;
The 'Approval' is for the aircraft to push in order to access the taxiway, not to pushback because it is clear behind.
Why then don't we say "intending to pushback" or "request traffic for pushback" instead of "request pushback"? ATC does have part-responsibility in this scenario. If it passed traffic to the Virgin on the Jetstar then fine.

From a staff utilisation perspective, it is rational not to use Engineers, they are simply too expensive for such tasks
Economic rationalism is great...right up to the point where that winglet knocked the tailbit off.

[John Eacott]

You either didn't read or didn't understand my post. You can push the aircraft around at 1 inch an hour and not guarantee a collision. Your chances increase as speed does. An Engineer is in nearly all cases going to be vastly more experienced than a baggage handler and the likelihood of a collision will reduce dramatically. For this function, an Engineer is not as fallible as the next human being.

I am intrigued with some of the assertions made here, and fail to understand why it has become the domain of a LAME to be able to move aircraft better than anyone else. Coming from a carrier background where aircraft are moved around with inches to spare on a pitching, moving deck at night by junior ratings with proper training and then given the responsibility due: none of them were engineers!

ISTM that there is a degree of job preservation going on here by those whose profession is to maintain the machines: not move them around the tarmac. Maybe a proper result would be to make the rampy's job one that is properly recognised and duly rewarded? After all, they are responsible for moving multi million $$$ assets.

Although I drive helicopters I was averaging 6 movements a day into and out of QF at YMML, so I was quite familiar with the way it is (or was) done!

[Wally Mk2]

With Tulla being designed & built back in the 60's I'd say that their future prediction traffic (ground & Airborne) wise was nothing like we have now.
Gee they actually designed & built the place (International spacing/parking wise) to suit the then jet of the day 707/DC8. Even the hydrant system was outdated & unable to service B747's side by side the day they opened the joint to international at first.
It's any wonder we have had an incident here & am sure there are a LOT of close calls that we never hear about.

Like our Rd system here in Oz we have neither the foresight or the ability to think way ahead & build for 2moro rather for 2day only!!

Tulla Airport is outdated & a disgrace where the shopping precinct & car parking take priority, we must look like hick backwoods folk to the advanced countries out there!!.


Wmk2

[Yarra]

"Economic rationalism is great...right up to the point where that winglet knocked the tailbit off".

And the flip side???. A company pays Engineers to push aircraft and they can still do the same type of damage...that would make an incident more difficult to understand if all companies subscribed to the view that Engineers only should do push backs......

I would be interested to know if this type of incident has increased since the function was removed from that of exclusively Engineers...

[VBA Engineer]

Let's just stay with the facts shall we.

Wingtip loss number 1: Right hand wing versus tail dock, Melbourne Jet Base. LAME

Wingtip loss number 2: Left hand wing versus stationary B737 elevator, Brisbane Hangar. LAME.

Wingtip loss number 3: Left hand wing versus stationary AirNZ B737, taxiing from Christchurch Hangar, Flight Crew

Wingtip loss number 4: Left hand wing versus Jetstar APU Exhaust, pushback Melbourne Airport. Ground Crew.

It's pie in the sky stuff to say that if it was a LAME it wouldn't have happened.

[AEROMEDIC]

This would not have happened if they used Wing Walkers. The requirement for Wing Walkers on congested aprons is outlined in the respective aircraft Maintenance Manuals. Rampies cannot access Maintenance Manuals.


If it IS the procedure in the maintenance manual, "rampies" should have understood and been conversant with the procedure in their training (assuming they had some).
A copy would have been placed in an accessible location and subject to regular revisions.
As with any vital procedure such as that involving movement of aircraft in a congested area, LAME's are accustomed to a "checking and checking again" culture. This is a culture that comes with the experience of taking responsibility at high levels.
It's unreasonable, in my view, to thrust people without this culture into activities that require it.
You don't have to be a LAME to be a good pushback operator, and I have seen some real pros in action.. But you DO need to have a professional attitude.
True.
Though in a misguided attempt to save a few dollars, this management looked to putting lesser paid and less experienced employees into positions that they shouldn't be in without that attitude.

Yes it's true you don't have to be a LAME to do pushbacks, but the culture and attitude of a LAME sure helps.

[Bumpfoh]

Going back a bit but Keg mentioned the differences between Domestic and International push-back procedures in MEL and who the instructions are given to by ATC, i.e via the aircraft for domestic and directly to the push-back driver for international.

Being involved in both regularly, the underlying factor no matter what the situation, is that the person on the headset is in charge of the push-back and is ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE for the push back.

Not trying to hang anyone here but if the VA push-back was un-sighted by the headset operator on the blindside then the push should not have started in the first place.

If VA are conducting push-backs in confined spaces without wing walkers then there is an element of culpability here me thinks.:ok:

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

I could write a book about this stuff and link you to countless references but my key message is this. The accident would have been less likely to have occurred if Virgin used Engineers to push the plane out. Forget your "how do you know that" response, I said less likely. This is because Engineers are more likely to be vastly more experienced than a baggage handler on the many aspects of the tarmac operation. That is why the limits and dangers are listed in Maintenance Manuals.

Baggage Handlers can be thrust into the headset role after only a few weeks. Many of them come and go and view the job as a transitional thing until they settle on a career. Some stay in Ramp and are great guys but their role is not one where problem solving is integral to what they do. It is more a production line mentality. Engineers are wired differently and usually err on the side of caution. It's just the way it is on Commercial Ramps. Your Navy or RAAF analogy is not the same, you don't have casual labour.

ISTM that there is a degree of job preservation going on here by those whose profession is to maintain the machines: not move them around the tarmac.

Your question is embedded with the incorrect assumption that it is not an Engineers job to "move them around the tarmac". Like I said it is in our manuals in controlled versions for a reason. It is part of our profession.

Job protection? Well that is the result of what I am advocating. Its not wrong for me to do that. If they were to replace a Pilot, Policeman, Doctor, Garbo, Cook, Train Driver or Ambo with another person without the appropriate skills, training or experience to do a job and it had such a similar dangerous or expensive outcome, you would hear the same from them. You would also hear from managers in those industries defending their cost cutting decisions.

Maybe a proper result would be to make the rampy's job one that is properly recognised and duly rewarded? After all, they are responsible for moving multi million $$$ assets.


This suggestion would also reduce the likelihood of an accident. I suspect it would be cheaper to use Engineers though, they are on the tarmac anyway.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Just an addition to the discussion on this accident. I have pushed hundreds of aircraft off the gate (D2) where this incident occurred. Never once did I do so without a Wing Walker. I've never seen a baggage handler use one.

The radio clearance is usually something like - clear to push when the Jetstar 320 has passed. It's up to the bloke on the headset to determine when that has occurred and he does not listen into the radio traffic as his mic is direct to the cockpit. There may be a holding short call from the parking aircraft that is heard by the tug driver but unless explicitly told to hold, the outgoing aircraft is free to continue.

[sheppey]

No Engineer will push a plane back for at least 4 years and the average one will have over 20 years experience.

They must be pretty dumb, or their training is seriously deficient if it takes all those years to learn to push a plane backwards safely:E

[airsupport]

While I am retired now, and have no intimate knowledge of this incident, I am amazed at some of the responses IF you are in fact Pilots.

I was involved in towing Aircraft all my 40 something year career and in these pushouts from when they started, the ONLY reason things have changed is the usual reason to save money.

We LAMEs and AMEs used to do all the towing too until the TWU wanted to take it from us, the Company agreed to industrial pressure from them and gave them all the pushouts (the driving NOT the headsets) but refused to give them all the towing. A lot of us thought IF you are going to do that let them do ALL the towing, like from the hangar in the middle of the night when it is raining but the Company would NOT. We found out why later when several times the TWU called a snap stoppage leaving Aircraft trapped at the gates. Then the Company said these Aircraft had to go to the hangar for some reason so were towed away by the LAMEs/AMEs for 10 minutes then brought back to the terminal and parked in a way they could just taxi out. :rolleyes:

Anyway back to the topic, I am amazed ANY Pilot would be in favour of this idea, surely you would prefer to have an LAME on the headset for departures?

I remember on a contract some 20 years ago pushing back at Taipei I was in the jump seat and there was a minor problem, the Captain started to explain the problem to the Guy on the headset who just ignored him and finished his ONLY job of getting us off the bay.

On another contract after that out of JFKNY, come our first departure and I went to do the headset duties for the pushback we were told that is NOT how it works here, the tug driver does all that. The Driver got the Aircraft away from the terminal okay, but as she disconnected the towbar and backed away the Aircraft followed her, she did NOT even know to ask/tell the Crew to park the brakes. After that the Pilots insisted we LAMEs did all the pushbacks.

Of course nobody is perfect, but when you have LAMEs who have spent their whole Lives looking after Aircraft why on Earth would you NOT use them when they are available? :ok:

[NSEU]

Engineers are wired differently and usually err on the side of caution.

Agreed. I've personally seen baggage handlers involved in about 10 company safety violations in Sydney in the last 2 months (events logged in a notebook and in some cases photographed). This is one person's observations, so you can multiply this by a hundred or so to get a true value of the total number of violations.

It's ironic that engineers now have to lug around those witches hats on every transit in Sydney because baggage handlers have run over and broken aircraft refuelling lines in the past. I also seem to recall one baggage handler snapping off a VHF antenna with his head when he drove under an aircraft in a small tug at speed.

[SRM]

If SOPs where followed this accident would not have happened, end of story.

[BPA]

SRM, Do you have proof SOP's weren't followed? If you do have you notified the ATSB? If you don't why post saying they weren't followed?

[framer]

I originally posted saying I was against LAME's being removed from pushbacks. Some posters have touched on the reason why.
LAME's have already proven their ' buy in' to the industry and their ability to take responsibility. Not everyone has arrived in adulthood with the ability to take responsibility, LAME's are more likely than your average Jo off the street to be experienced and practiced at it.
If you take your ramp staff and put them through the appropriate training that weeds out the ones that aren't that way inclined and then pay them commensurate with the responsibility that the job holds then I have no problem. But as Fed Sec said, then it wouldn't be economically advantageous anyway.

[neville_nobody]

But as Fed Sec said, then it wouldn't be economically advantageous anyway

If what airsupport says is correct it sounds more of a political decision rather than economic. I guess the question is how many accidents are you willing to wear to save your labour costs.

[framer]

Maybe then but I think now days the primary driver is cost cutting.
You see it every single day while operating, not quiiiiiite enough staff to get the job done on time and staff who are 'transient' due to the low pay so that they never get a chance to build experience and feel secure in their job.

[Ngineer]

I've personally seen baggage handlers involved in about 10 company safety violations in Sydney in the last 2 months (events logged in a notebook and in some cases photographed).

Nothing against the guys, but I can agree. Some some stuff has gone down in Syd by ramp employees of an organisation I will not name that you simply would not print hear.

[RATpin]

Good to know that Virgin have a no discrimination policy and employ the visually impaired,perhaps they might like to reassess their job allocations.

[buzzz.lightyear]

It would seem that...

Cost cutting meant shortage of ground staff to marshall JQ so then held short while waiting.

Cost cutting meant no wing walker provided. (Because there has never been a problem before)

Cost cutting meant bag chucker does pushback instead of experienced engineer.

Cost cutting meant removal of ATC apron specific freq (121.2) along time ago when there were nowhere near as many movements as there are today.

Revenue raising meant increasing size of lettable terminal space that subsequently reduced apron area to absolute minimum.

In the meantime, those that have made the bonuses from said cost cutting etc wander off into the sunset to create havoc elsewhere.

[airsupport]

If what airsupport says is correct it sounds more of a political decision rather than economic. I guess the question is how many accidents are you willing to wear to save your labour costs.

Of course, everything I say here is correct.............. :ok:

The decision to take away driving the tugs on pushouts from Engineers definitely was political. :(

As I said before though the Companies refused to allow Engineers to be removed from towing, and oddly we also kept doing pushouts from terminals IF the Aircraft was going on a test, training or ferry flight, we were removed from ALL revenue flights.

I am not sure about the taking away of LAMEs from pushouts altogether, that is off the headsets even.

[parabellum]

4/. The amount of unnecessary RT on ground frequencies needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency.

One way to reduce congestion on the ground frequency is to do what major airports the rest of the world over do, have a specific clearance delivery frequency. After receiving clearance aircraft will either be told to change to Ground Movement Control when ready for push or told to stay on the CDF if any changes or delays are likely. ATC management should be able to sort that one out.

[ASY68]

Para, due to ML staff shortages it's predominantly combined ACD/SMC

[004wercras]

Aargh yes, yet again that good old issue raises its head, its called 'minimal standards'. The benchmark has been lowered and lowered over the years. In many cases instead of having a Gingerbeer on the headset complete with Gingerbeer wing walkers you now have guys who were plumbers and house painters 6 months ago now pushing back aircraft. That is the standard, 2013, and that is a fact.
I once had a 30 year + Gingerbeer stop us mid push (737-300) just after we started to roll. Why? Because he 'heard something that wasn't right'. Our panel showed nothing, then 2 seconds later bingo, there goes a red light on the display. Aircraft towed back into the blocks and U/S. Bloody unbelievable!! That is experience for you, unlike today's house painter pushing the aircraft around.

The Melbourne accident, at this point, looks like an accident that should not have ever occurred. Good weather, serviceable aircraft, vision unobstructed. One plane pulls up short by 10m and old mate on the adjacent bay doing the push misses the lot, including beacons?? It's either stupidity or inexperience. My guess is inexperience. Could it have happened with a 30 year + Gingerbeer in charge, yep of course it could. But not as likely. It's a simple analysis, over time you take away the qualified Engineer and wing walkers and this is what you get.
I know of another pushback stopped by a rampie who was on the headsets because he thought he spotted a fuel leak. It was water from a aircon pack doing its job on a stinking hot summer day. He had no idea of absolutely anything about an aircraft. Scary ****.

Mr Borghetti and other penny pinching bean counters you reap what you sew. Welcome to a lesson in karma :ok:

P.S Anybody wishing for an ATSB 'recommendation' out of this, keep dreaming.
Anybody thinking CAsA could give a toss about this you are also dreaming.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Good posts and discussion guys. I wish some of you could write my notices.

I flew from Mel today and thought I would have a look at another Virgin push out from the same gate. They have not learned one thing from this.

Gates D2 and D4 were occupied. Aircraft pushing from Virgin E1. Baggage Handler pushing with a towbarless unit. Handler walking on rh side of aircraft with, you guessed it, no Wing Walker on lh side of aircraft.

The Handler has absolutely no visibility of the left of the aircraft as he is pushing backwards with a remote control towards a parked aircraft on D2. There is not much room even with the 738 on D2 fully parked.

The argument over Engineer versus Baggage Handler is one thing, the way the departments have responded to this is another issue. You reckon they would have thought to do it safely at least for a while.

[ampclamp]

Good luck with changing their minds fed sec but...I just cannot see any manager changing their minds and admit they may have been wrong. It would be admitting liability.
Procedures will be re-written, people counseled or sacked, it will be risk assessed and work-shopped to death. :sad: Then another newb will do it again down the track sometime.
I'd love to be wrong.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Just hearing a little more about this today. Our members get along great with the Baggage Handlers. There is no issue between the two groups and they feel like these extra responsibilities have been thrust upon them unfairly.

Apparently the Baggage Handlers have over previous months complained countless times to Virgin Management that they require additional staff on that bay to walk the wings and check for clearances. they have been repeatedly told that they do not require them and denied the additional labour.

The manager who has been rejecting them was interviewing all those involved in the accident. He is a systems analysts with no Aviation background. I have no doubt he put himself in charge of the investigation to cover the process that led to the bingle. ATSB walked in to the process and recognised immediately that this manager should have no involvement in the investigation. At least one step has worked as it should.

[DirectAnywhere]

Also going back to Keg's post #45.

1. Was it a domestic VOZ or international? Domestic we pass on instructions to the driver. Internationally it's direct to the driver.

What a shambles this system is. I don't know why Melbourne chooses to operate differently to every other international port I've operated into but this direct to the driver bit doubles the transmissions required on SMC for every pushback.

[AEROMEDIC]

If Virgin are unwilling to provide extra staff as wing walkers, I would then expect that wing walkers are not required in such circumstances as per their Procedures Manual. If it is required, then extra staff MUST be provided otherwise the company will be in breach of their own procedures.

Can anyone advise on this? I DO know it's in Qantas Towing Procedures Manual for maintenance purposes, but not sure at ramp locations.

[BPA]

ALAEA Fed Sec,

Also when PPU's are used the dispatcher (engineer or pilot) doesn't stay on one side of the aircraft, they move around looking out for any obstacles.

Post edited after re-reading ALAEA Fed Sec post.

[600ft-lb]

Say for example there was a fatality in a situation similar to this. I wouldn't like to be the person who signed off on the risk assessment for single person 737 pushbacks especially when can't see an entire 1/2 of the aircraft unless you're 1ft tall.

[004wercras]

ampclamp, I agree entirely, management won't admit to the mistake, but they don't need to mate because $3 million worth of damage is all the proof you need!
If it is true that the buffoon manager who is partially responsible for this mess is running the VA internal investigation, or in any way involved, then this shows a mentality of possible cover up, and executive management would be well aware of this, so another sham is unveiled. Who the hell is running ground operations at senior airport level and higher up at The Village?
Will the ATsB investigation include a review of emails of concern from ramp staff regarding manpower and a lack of wing walker issues? Have safety reports been put in by the ramp staff expressing their safety concerns? And if so, what has been the documented response from the company?
As Fed Sec says, he himself has noted the same or similar issue still taking place even after the accident, so where is CAsA? Are their inspectors not capable of such basic surveillance and can't make similar observations or findings? Does this accident not rate highly in their book, they would rather chase 172 pilots scud running or write up a farmer for leaving coffee stains on the seat of his R22?

And I agree with Fed's comments, the issue isn't between rampies and Gingerbeers per se, both groups work pretty well together at VA. The issue quite simply is that it is cheaper to have a rampie push aircraft than a licensed engineer. Safety and/or risk doesn't come into management decision process, the bottom line and bonuses are what count.
This incident had the potential to be a hell of a lot worse. Will the airlines wake up to themselves?

[SpannerTwister]

I'm surprised that there's been very little commentary on how close this was to a catastrophe :{

Probably only a meter or two away from slicing the APU fuel feed line, and had that have happened there wouldn't be much "cheese" between fuel leaking from the severed fuel line, said fuel igniting on the red-hot APU exhaust and the resulting (smallish but not yet a disaster ) fire, finding fuel vapours from the other aircrafts fuel vents.

No-one's going to guarantee the flame arrester in the NACA duct is going to prevent a disastrous explosion when it is exposed to a raw-fuel fire.

A serious accident suddenly turned into a catastrophe !

As always, in these circumstances the many layers of cheese have failed, but if the company knew that there was limited visibility and yet only rostered one person to carry out the pushback then the manager concerned should be tied to a chair, have matchsticks made to prop their eyes open and made to watch this series of videos.

Actually, ANYONE working in the aviation industry should be made to watch this video as part of their re-certification each year for whatever their job is.

Normalization Of Deviance Part 1 - YouTube


ST

(If you haven't seen these videos, download them and when you've got an hour to spare become much more informed !)

[AnQrKa]

Single person pushbacks are not uncommon especially in the US and dont forget there have been push back accidents before in oz with a full roster of engineers conducting the procedure.

In fact, wasn't someone run over at AN during a fully staffed pushback?

Too early to jump on the "single person pushback is unsafe" bandwagon.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

ALAEA Fed Sec,

Might want to check your facts about what type of unit was used for the push.

Also when PPU's are used the dispatcher (engineer or pilot) doesn't stay on one side of the aircraft, they move around looking out for any obstacles.

I watched the push. What facts would I need to check? The Baggage Handler on the push never moved from the RH front side of aircraft. The left wing (which was closest to the D2 APU) was never once visible from where he walked.

Too early to jump on the "single person pushback is unsafe" bandwagon.

After pushing thousands of aircraft I am not jumping to any conclusions by saying that no aircraft should be pushed backwards when you cannot see if it will hit another aircraft or not. You err on the safe side though and put your trust in the systems analysts who've come straight out of school to tell us what to do.

[BPA]

The reason the dispatchers(engineer or baggage handler) stay on the FO side of the 737 during pushback with a tug is the headset connection is on that side and they cannot move over to the other side due to the tug and towbar being in the way. I've been pushed back many a time with a tug from this bay with engineers doing the push and they stay on the FO's side, so like the dispatcher doing the push on Saturday, they (engineers) cannot see past the aircaft.

As I said if the push on Saturday was done with a PPU then the accident may not have occurred as usng a PPU the dispatchers (engineers or baggage handlers) are free to move around the front of the aircaft without a towbar or tug getting in the way.Also if the Virgin aircaft was an Embraer the accident may not have occurred as the dispatchers connect to the captains side of the aircaft and stay on that side during pushback(no PPU's used on the Embraer's).

Post edited after re-reading Fed Sec's post, thought he was talking about the incident pushback.

[Derfred]

BPA, I think you are confusing the incident with the subsequent pushback that FedSec observed and described. Read post #88 again.

[airsupport]

Single person pushbacks are not uncommon especially in the US

Having had some experience with how things are done in the US I cringe when people use that as an excuse. :ugh:

Read my previous post, true story, the local handling people at JFK insisted on doing the pushback on our (Aussie) Aircraft, single person just the tug driver wearing a headset, pity she had no idea what she was doing, disconnected tug and towbar without talking to the Crew so brakes were not parked when she disconnected, luckily we followed the Aircraft and were able to at least signal the Crew. Our Company then told them that we Engineers would be on all future pushouts.

[Cactusjack]

Out of curiosity what was the root cause of the 2 VA incidents in LA where aircraft were damaged during push/tow? It's not a trick question or a smart arse one, just curious, even though it wasn't VA staff in LA doing the ground handling it does seem as if there have been some fairly serious ramp handling incidents , at least 3 now with VA, does it not seem like there is a higher than average occurrence rate? Is there a systemic issue here? Lack of workable procedures? Lack of internal or third party oversight?
Anyway, the chickens have come home to roost. When you have ground staff continually expressing their concern at having insufficient manpower to carry out the task, a quite serious and potentially dangerous task at that, then this is the end result. Heads should roll, and I'm not talking about the guy on the headset, I'm talking at a level above that. Too many managers thinking that pushing a plane is as risky as reversing your Bentley out of your Clayfield mansion. Fools.

[SRM]

BPA Refer to my previous post :

Ground Crews also have SOP's. The pushback crew are responsible for the safety of the aircraft during the pushback/tow.

This has not changed in my 50 years or so in aviation, end of story.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

As I said if the push on Saturday was done with a PPU then the accident may not have occurred as usng a PPU the dispatchers (engineers or baggage handlers) are free to move around the front of the aircaft without a towbar or tug getting in the way.

Yes I was talking about the push I observed. It was PPU and I am not sure why but the Handler never moved from the RH (FO) side. Because there was no tug on the nose he would have been free to move.

It would have caused another problem though. The aircraft he was pushing was going back between the International aircraft on D2 and D4. He couldn't watch them both. How hard can it be to put a bloody Wing Walker out there? The only answer I can think of is, they have none. Not enough staff because they are penny pinching. Hope they have lots of pennies to pay Jetstar for the damage they caused.

[framer]

Ground Crews also have SOP's. The pushback crew are responsible for the safety of the aircraft during the pushback/tow.

This has not changed in my 50 years or so in aviation, end of story.
I agree 100% with that statement. That is the reason why requirements for recruitment of people for the job should include a proven ability to take serious levels of responsibility. The way it stands some ramp staff might be champions at it while others may fall short in that area. It's a pretty big responsibility when the a/c is full of pax.

[airsupport]

When new staff are employed to carry out these duties, who actually trains them, Engineers or the ramp staff that are currently doing the job?

Is the training adequate?

Just curious, on that contract at JFKNY I spoke of before where they were obviously not trained well enough, we had our flight arriving at the ITR one day and the guidance lights were not working, after our Aircraft had sat short of the bay for some 10 minutes I asked who was going to marshal it onto the bay, NOT one person knew how to as they had never been trained, I went ahead and did it for which the Crew and our Company were grateful, and guess what I was chastised for doing it by the local Airport Manager, he tells me off instead of having his people trained to marshal Aircraft. :ugh:

[Long Bay Mauler]

Not having been there, but from my common observations, this accident most likely occurred due to the Jetstar pilots not fully being on the bay, and there not being a marshaller to arrive the aircraft.

Time and time again, both JQ and occasionally QF drivers will taxi onto a bay without being marshalled, stopping short of the designated stop line until someone appears to complete the arrival. There is a belief that the taxiway must be cleared,but at what cost? This shows why you should never taxi on to a bay without appropriate clearance because other aircraft may mistake you for having completed your on bay arrival even though the beacon is still on.

Just remember, you only see one area from your goldfish bowl, but most other operators see the picture better outside the bowl.

[PPRuNeUser0198]

The Jetstar aircraft was correctly in the bay, at the correct stop-line.

[porch monkey]

Not according to ground and the initial investigation.........

[parabellum]

The Jetstar aircraft was correctly in the bay, at the correct stop-line.

Nope. Eyewitness reports contradict that.

[Capn Bloggs]

The Jetstar aircraft was correctly in the bay, at the correct stop-line.

Not according to ground and the initial investigation.........

Nope. Eyewitness reports contradict that.

Somebody is telling lies. Stop stuffing us around! :=

[bloated goat]

If Jetstar was parked correctly at D2 the Virgin plane would have had to be pushed back soooooo far backwards in order to hit tail cone to wingtip.

[The Golden Rivet]

You don't need wing walkers if you use the correct push out line and stay with the nose wheel on the centre of that line, the wing tip clearances were taken into account when the lead in and lead out lines were painted on, if jetstar was not at its stop bar and yid was being pushed after seeing the 320 at what looked to be its final parked position then bang.....

[airsupport]

I do not believe it is safe for anyone to push an aircraft if they cannot see where it is going .The push-back should have a wing walker if in any doubt. You just cannot be allowed or expected to push blindly in tight spots and assume it is clear even if the crew have been cleared to push-back. In short, people need more support out there. It is not just other aircraft you can hit.

I just can NOT believe how low the standards have sunk nowadays. :(

Back in my day, yes when Dinosaurs roamed the Airports ;) ALL pushbacks were done with 2 people, usually both Engineers, and as stated it is NOT just the danger of striking another Aircraft, numerous times I had vehicles go right behind the Aircraft during pushback, more than once a baggage handler drove up to the Aircraft and opened a hold to throw another bag in, even had one day as we began the pushback the Traffic Officer opened the front door again. :uhoh:

To do ANY pushback with one person is just silly and so dangerous. :ugh:

[Ngineer]

To do ANY pushback with one person is just silly and so dangerous.

The game has changed. Safety comes second to cost.

Tombstone maint, World best practice, etc etc etc.

[Kiwiconehead]

You don't need wing walkers if you use the correct push out line and stay with the nose wheel on the centre of that line,

How many times have you seen a ramp monkey follow a pushout line?

None of the Qantas ones would.

[framer]

The correct push out line and nose wheel positioning won't prevent you from hitting something. For that to be true every other human involved in pushing or taxiing or driving a ground vehicle nearby would have to get things 100% right 100% of the time and that never has happened and never will happen. Humans make mistakes, accept it and design systems to cater for it. Easy.

[airsupport]

The game has changed. Safety comes second to cost.

So it would seem. :(

No great surprise then that these incidents will happen more and more. :(

[Townsville Refueller]

The game has changed. Safety comes second to cost.


Sad but true, there used to always be 2 of us at every refuelling, now only 1, purely to save cost. :{

[Upper Deck]

"How many times have you seen a ramp monkey follow a pushout line?"


Still confused. Was this a PPU or Tug & Tow Bar pushback ?

1. Was the Virgin Australia aircraft being pushed back following the
Push Back Line accurately

2. Did the Virgin Australia aircraft stop at or before the Push Back
Limit Line

[airsupport]

You don't need wing walkers if you use the correct push out line and stay with the nose wheel on the centre of that line

That is like saying you will never have an accident on the road as long as you follow the marked lanes and stay in the centre of the lane. :rolleyes:

Never mind about other drivers, other vehicles, people or animals, fallen trees or power poles etc etc............... :ooh:

[The Golden Rivet]

So how many posting have actually pushed with a p.p.u or a tug and tow-bar and at those gates in particular?

Why would you need wing walkers when the wings are already clear of any fixed structure and at least 10 metres from the adj a/c, and as for pushing while not following the lead out line, is that a procedural/staffing issue that's virgins fault?

[Derfred]

I could start with about 3 million good reasons...

[VicVector]

I saw Virgin push off D2 today.
They used two wing walkers.
As soon as the Aircraft was nearly off the bay, the wing walkers vacated.
The tug driver got dangerously close with the tail to the wall as he swung around and had to pull forward and correct twice before disconnect.
The wing walkers should have stayed around for clearance on the tail.
Bit of a worry.

[PT6]

The Golden Rivet So how many posting have actually pushed with a p.p.u or a tug and tow-bar and at those gates in particular?

Why would you need wing walkers when the wings are already clear of any fixed structure and at least 10 metres from the adj a/c, and as for pushing while not following the lead out line, is that a procedural/staffing issue that's virgins fault?


I can think of many reasons too.

[MrWooby]

Even wing walkers don't guarantee a collision won't occur.

I remember an incident in the RAAF years ago when a P3 Orion was being towed in front of a 707, there was a groundie standing at the nose of the 707, ensuring clearance and holding his thumb up. He sheepishly rotated his hand to indicate thumbs down as the P3 wingtip sliced through the 707's nose.

[falconx]

Has anyone checked the lines, as far as I'm aware to push off D2 you need to push all the way back to the taxiway to swing around, not this push pull correct crap

[AEROMEDIC]

I could start with about 3 million good reasons...

How about it starts with the procedures manual?

If you are operating IAW it, you have "a chair when the music stops".

[framer]

Why would you need wing walkers when the wings are already clear of any fixed structure and at least 10 metres from the adj a/c
Ohh I don't know......maybe just in case a Jetstar aircraft holds short of the bay and the guy pushing has made an error of judgement and cuts the APU off with the winglet?

[Tankengine]

VicVector, maybe they thought they only needed to look at the wings!:E
Otherwise they would be called "tail walkers".:}

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

The push from the Virgin gate does not follow lines. The aircraft is slotted between D2 and D4.

[gordonfvckingramsay]

Arguing the pros and cons of wing-walkers v's no wing-walkers is moot don't you think?

The one and only reason we don't have wing-walkers is cost. Some accountants (rather simplistic) risk analysis has concluded that there is a boost to the bottom line and therefore it is safe.

If only someone qualified in some way had made the decision, we wouldn't have two needlessly bent aeroplanes. Nor would we have risked the lives of a hundred or so people.

This is a glimpse at how simplistic decisions, made years before, by bean counters can manifest themselves as accidents.

We aviation types with a direct interest in threat and error management might call these things "latent threats".

Just saying :ok:

[ASY68]

VicVictor,

The D2 push would of been done by the Toll Dnata. The pull forward is apart of the push.

Regards,

[ASY68]

Alaea fed sec,

There is a line buddy, pull on your hi vis and get your ASIC renewed and go have a look.

Pay attention to the black and WHITE lines which are for pushes.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Yellow and black is your taxi. Black and white is usually an inverse arc compared to the taxi turn. I could get my vest on and go for a walk and I admit that I haven't. Are you saying the black and white push line runs off and deviates between International gates 2 and 4? There was never a line there for the 12 years I worked the Mel tarmac.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Righto. I may be the first ever union boss to say these words. I was wrong. Just had a look on google earth and there are lines everywhere.

http://i42.tinypic.com/14t25qo.jpg


and a little bit closer so you can all carry out the investigation from your lounge rooms.


http://i40.tinypic.com/v5itna.jpg

[missy]

Every hour aircraft are arriving at gates/bays where the NIGS haven't been configured or the marshaller isn't on-site. Why?

Since the MEL accident there are more and more aircraft advising that they aren't on the bay (NIGS not on or set for a different type or the marshaller isn't available). Surely these arriving aircraft aren't a surprise (??), could it be a staffing issue...

[Torqueman]

This is an old photo. All the lines have been re surveyed since the tarmac area was re done recently.

[ALAEA Fed Sec]

Photo is from google maps so could be a couple of years old. It is different than my time there because of all the ongoing works. It does show how confusing it is though.

[le Pingouin]

2009 if you look bottom right of image :)

[VicVector]

The D2 push would of been done by the Toll Dnata. The pull forward is apart of
the push.


In the situation that I witnessed there was 'multiple' pull forwards. Looked bad. The tail of the 73 swung around too far east and was way too close to the wall. The driver seemed to wander from the line quite a bit. I have pushed from this gate (on maintenance tows) and I pass no judgement on the driver as I know it can get tricky. Cheers.

[mumblechap]

ATSB has posted an update on their website. It's an interesting read about what pilots/groundcrew/ATC did and didn't do.

[ASY68]

Wing walkers now in place for E1 pushes

[Cactusjack]

Here is one for the shareholders to dine on as they await an elusive return on investment;
WARNING : The below article contains graphic images of FOD, incompetence and arrogance from management for not listening to staff or acting upon internal reports;

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian (http://m.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/melbourne-parking-bingle-grounds-jetstar-a320-virgin-faces-compo-claim/story-e6frg95x-1226709007063)

Of course no heads rolled yet. No problem, executive bonuses are still safe, nothing to worry about. Add this accident to several in LA and you see a pattern within ground operations oversight. And yet Borghetti accepts all of this and refuses to rid his senior team of those incompetent enough to accept this standard?? More ridiculous shenanigans.

[Cactusjack]

Is the SYD APM still poncing around the terminal? Has he fallen on his sword yet as the accountable manager for this costly debacle? Of course not! That's what happens when the company sends a boy to do a mans job! Between ol 'blue eyes' and the 'steroid muncher' taking terms managing SYD, these managers can get away with anything.
Good ol VA, always quick to throw a blue collar to the wind, but heaven forbid that a white collar be held to account for a major blunder := Not much has changed in 13 years. And the interim internal accident investigation to date has been pathetic. Poorly handled by that bald headed fool who has spent a decade prancing around the safety department just chatting with people and drinking coffee. He wouldn't know how to investigate a flat tyre on a baggage barrow. This mob are a joke.

[S70IP]

Cactus,

Dude, seriously, you need to go see someone. Get some therapy, take some prescribed happy drugs, holiday or whatever.

[coaldemon]

How is the SYD Apm responsible for a Melbourne incident?

[Berealgetreal]

S70IP took the words out of my mouth.

Whilst some of what Cactus says about some inefficiencies are fairly spot on, years and years of grinding the axe isn't healthy. Seriously, I'm not having a go.

Whilst we all at some stage have had an employer that shat us to tears and that we'd love to see go down in a ball of flames at some stage of our life there is a point where you move on and forget they exist.

Smashing them here doesn't hurt them one bit, the show rolls on but to include this in your life for years after you've left..