PDA

View Full Version : two AF planes collided in fog at CDG


readywhenreaching
11th May 2016, 09:09
happened this morning
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiKhO1MWsAEpsA6.jpg

report at jacdec.de (http://www.jacdec.de/2016/05/11/2016-05-11-air-france-b773-and-a320-collided-in-fog-at-paris-cdg/)

FRying
11th May 2016, 15:03
Apparently, towed 777 was run into 320's tail section...

DaveReidUK
11th May 2016, 16:11
The timings don't quite add up.

JACDEC reports that the collision took place at 03:57Z (05:57L) as the 777 was taxying in. The outbound A320 wasn't due to push until 07:15L, so it seems more likely that it was the one being towed onto stand at the time.

Either that, or the time reported for the event is incorrect.

Edit: It was indeed the empty 777 that was being towed off stand, the incident took place at 07:30L, according to this report:

Deux avions d'Air France entrent en collision Roissy-Charles-de-Gaulle - L'Express (http://www.lexpress.fr/actualite/societe/deux-avions-d-air-france-entrent-en-collision-a-roissy-charles-de-gaulle_1791017.html)

sb_sfo
11th May 2016, 16:30
Ouch, F-GZNT first flight 21 March this year. Probably still had new-airplane smell.

RAT 5
12th May 2016, 10:08
Is this another case of a costly collision because a towed a/c did not have a 'wing walker' (as in eyeballs on the ground and not some dolly on top of a bi-plane) in contact with the tug driver?

A7700
18th May 2016, 17:29
Even if the "walk" is for about 6 km ?

Geosync
18th May 2016, 17:36
Sometimes wing walkers just end up being witnesses to the impact. I've watched many videos where a wing walker is clearly looking at the wing/vert. stab as it impacts another aicraft/wall, and says absolutely nothing!

RAT 5
18th May 2016, 18:40
The ineptness (human error) of the participant is not necessarily a fault in the basic idea. Lack of training/awareness/concentration/responsibility etc.?

llondel
18th May 2016, 23:11
Even if the "walk" is for about 6 km ?

You could always have wing bikers then.

Capn Bloggs
18th May 2016, 23:11
The ineptness (human error) of the participant is not necessarily a fault in the basic idea. Lack of training/awareness/concentration/responsibility etc.?
Brilliant! :D

RAT 5
20th May 2016, 09:56
Come on Bloggs: you know what I meant. I've seen too many totally unnecessary very expensive fuselage damages due to towing/pushbacks without wingtip spotters. Many of these were a/c being pushed out of hangers after maintenance. No yellow lines and an inconvenient spotlight pole that just happened to jump out and strike the a/c for no good reason.
No a/c movement without a spotter is a basic procedure like 2 people in the cockpit at all times. Whether people follow that SOP, professionally, is another matter. But what is guaranteed is no-one will do it if it's not required. Common sense disappeared long ago.

Capn Bloggs
20th May 2016, 10:42
Rat, I was serious. Your statement should be on the desktop as a safety message. It might make people think about not dumbing down the rules but training up the participants. :ok:

RAT 5
20th May 2016, 17:17
Thanks Bloggs. A few times previously we were on the same side. Now we are in violent agreement. I misinterpreted your smiley.