View Full Version : Watertanker hits A380 at Zurich
Machinbird
16th Oct 2016, 14:23
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cu6jSo0XYAA_wrF.jpg
An emerging story just hitting the rags.
A380 muss am Boden bleiben: Crash mit Wasserlaster sorgt für Chaos am Flughafen Kloten - Blick (http://www.blick.ch/news/schweiz/a380-muss-am-boden-bleiben-crash-mit-wasserlaster-sorgt-fuer-chaos-am-flughafen-kloten-id5614435.html)
Bleve
17th Oct 2016, 02:53
Actually it does not look like the tanker hit the aircraft at all (no scratches or scrape marks on the airframe). I'm guessing it was under the aircraft during refuelling/cargo loading and the aircraft settled onto the tanker.
Piltdown Man
17th Oct 2016, 08:22
Let the tyres down, drive it off, do the paperwork.
golfyankeesierra
17th Oct 2016, 13:13
Looks a lot like like tail tipping to me, although that's more a freighter/combi thing..
A380 prone to tailtipping?
Only thing is that that center hatch (why 3 hatches BTW?) is bent backwards quite a bit and also has its rod broken off.
Torquelink
17th Oct 2016, 14:37
Aircraft departed for SIN - presumably ferry for repair as sister ship departed four hours ago to operate the schedule?
Looks a lot like like tail tipping to me, although that's more a freighter/combi thing..
A380 prone to tailtipping?
It's probably just the compression of the gear with fuel, cargo and pax going on. The A380 isn't that high off the ground to start with. It looks like the truck is too far forward.
There are about five panels in that area. Some are potable water, fuelling control and vacuum toilet panels. I don't know what the two large ones are for.
millionaire
18th Oct 2016, 03:39
Fact : The aircraft was hit by the water servicing truck. Now you only need to figure out why and how the truck driver did it .
overshot ! the bent back panel is the water service panel !
falcon12
18th Oct 2016, 12:10
The water service point is 'normally' 2.52m above the ground, which is well higher than the top of the WSU's tank. No need to back the truck under the aircraft so, as has been asked before, how did it get there?
G-CPTN
18th Oct 2016, 13:50
Fact : The aircraft was hit by the water servicing truck. Now you only need to figure out why and how the truck driver did it .
The truck reversed under the static aircraft.
(I deduced that when I first saw the photograph.)
I confess that my primary occupation involved investigating 'incidents' with (prototype) commercial vehicles (trucks).
As they were 'prototypes' there was no historical evidence, therefore I had to accumulate as much information as possible.
Not all incidents were collisions (in fact very few were) but it was important to register whatever surrounding circumstances might have influenced the incident.
In this case I deduced that the truck had struck the access panel protuberance from the front of the aircraft rather than a simple vertical crush.
pax2908
18th Oct 2016, 14:59
Because at first they could not find the ladder?
Machinbird
22nd Oct 2016, 22:30
Actually it does not look like the tanker hit the aircraft at all (no scratches or scrape marks on the airframe). I'm guessing it was under the aircraft during refuelling/cargo loading and the aircraft settled onto the tanker.
Those of you who think the vehicle rammed underneath the aircraft to create this damage are probably wrong. Bleve's version has my vote.
Look at the suspension on the water tanker. The vehicle is strongly down by the nose which is not surprising considering the cab is trying to hold up an elephant. If the vehicle had driven under a static aircraft and wedged itself in that position, you would be seeing significant scars along the belly of the aircraft. I don't see any, do you? The hatch with the broken restraining rod merely hit the body of the truck and was deflected further open as the aircraft settled. Note: I briefly found a picture of the aircraft damage area taken after the truck was removed. The honeycomb penetration was localized. Unfortunately, I don't have that link now.
If the vehicle had driven under a static aircraft and wedged itself in that position, you would be seeing significant scars along the belly of the aircraft.
Is there no step between the fuselage and the bulbous wing to body fairings (on the centreline)?
When Millionaire said "Fact", I assumed he had read the official report or was at the aircraft at the time of the incident.
Truck has overshot service point . Normal access for water is from side so this can't happen.Toilet truck drives into that area but nearer the tail so no clearance problems. Don't see much more than a few inches movement on this a/c during turnrounds in terms of settling.
G-CPTN
22nd Oct 2016, 23:26
Don't see much more than a few inches movement on this a/c during turnrounds in terms of settling.
If you consider the unladen weight and the payload, there wouldn't be much settlement.
OTOH, it wouldn't take much to reduce 'zero' clearance to contact.