Air France jet clips smaller plane at New York's JFK airport
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Crawley
Age: 70
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A380 shunt
Bare in mind that aircraft have to follow the green taxi lines which are also illuminated by green lights at night.
So either they were not following that line,running off the line,or the parked aircraft was parked too far back (not likely) or its a simple matter of the A380 just being too big for this taxiway . It all depends if it can be proved that the 380 was off track and too far to the left of the taxi lin
a sign seen airside on most airports uk
' Pilots and tug drivers are responsible for wingtip clearance!
So either they were not following that line,running off the line,or the parked aircraft was parked too far back (not likely) or its a simple matter of the A380 just being too big for this taxiway . It all depends if it can be proved that the 380 was off track and too far to the left of the taxi lin
a sign seen airside on most airports uk
' Pilots and tug drivers are responsible for wingtip clearance!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Orlando, FL, USA
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by quagmeyer
]Bottom line though, the Management of US airlines have become transfixed with outsourcing of jobs and routes to the Replacement Jets (RJ's) and it must stop. JFK is an International airport meant for International airplanes not RJ'S.
Preliminary data would seem to indicate that the ONLY passenger airliner that would NOT have cleared the RJ in this incident happens to be the A380. That would appear to indicate that the A380 is "too big" as opposed to the CRJ being "too small".
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Double Oak, Texas
Age: 71
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't read thru this whole cackling hens thread, but notice much mention that a 380 Captain or copilot can NOT see the wingtips when seated in the cockpit. I could not see the wingtips either as I recall from the left or right seat of a 777, 767, 757 and I don't think I could from a DC10 a 727 or Super 80.
If any of you pilots would like a simple (but takes a little time/effort) method of learning where your invisible wingtips are...... go out on the ramp and grab a few of those orange plastic traffic cones that are all over ramps. Put a cone directly under the left wingtip. Walk forward parallel to the fuselage and place another cone abeam the cockpit. Move forward, again paralell to the fuselage perhaps 1/2 aircraft length and place another cone on the tarmac. Climb aboard your aircraft, get in the left seat an adjust the seat exactly as you would for flight. Now turn your head left (don't lean or bend body just swivel head) and note where the orange cone is in your left window. MEMORIZE THAT SPOT mark it with a grease pencil or use an identifiable part of a window frame whatever. Look ahead and to the left at the cone placed ahead of the aircraft. Where does that cone appear on your glareshield??? You now KNOW where your left wingtip is going to be in the future when the aircraft moves straight ahead. You can, and should do the same for the right wingtip using "landmarks" on the windows of the right side of the cockpit. Have your co-pilots do this same exercise, because they are also on scene when metal is bent and probably would like to know where the wingtips are as well.
I liked to move the cone ahead of the aircraft on the left to the spot where the cone was in the left corner of the glareshield and the left windshield vertical post of the 77, 75 and 76.
This method will give you an inner peace (just try it)); knowing where your wingtips are while taxiing about various airports on the planet; at least during those times you are going straight.
You can also look ahead of you when directly behind like aircraft on a taxiway and see where their wingtips are in "landmarks" on your windows.
The technique was very helpful as a CKA when riding around with a new Captain who had no clue about his/her wingtip location. Showed 'em the cone technique during the first walk around check.
If any of you pilots would like a simple (but takes a little time/effort) method of learning where your invisible wingtips are...... go out on the ramp and grab a few of those orange plastic traffic cones that are all over ramps. Put a cone directly under the left wingtip. Walk forward parallel to the fuselage and place another cone abeam the cockpit. Move forward, again paralell to the fuselage perhaps 1/2 aircraft length and place another cone on the tarmac. Climb aboard your aircraft, get in the left seat an adjust the seat exactly as you would for flight. Now turn your head left (don't lean or bend body just swivel head) and note where the orange cone is in your left window. MEMORIZE THAT SPOT mark it with a grease pencil or use an identifiable part of a window frame whatever. Look ahead and to the left at the cone placed ahead of the aircraft. Where does that cone appear on your glareshield??? You now KNOW where your left wingtip is going to be in the future when the aircraft moves straight ahead. You can, and should do the same for the right wingtip using "landmarks" on the windows of the right side of the cockpit. Have your co-pilots do this same exercise, because they are also on scene when metal is bent and probably would like to know where the wingtips are as well.
I liked to move the cone ahead of the aircraft on the left to the spot where the cone was in the left corner of the glareshield and the left windshield vertical post of the 77, 75 and 76.
This method will give you an inner peace (just try it)); knowing where your wingtips are while taxiing about various airports on the planet; at least during those times you are going straight.
You can also look ahead of you when directly behind like aircraft on a taxiway and see where their wingtips are in "landmarks" on your windows.
The technique was very helpful as a CKA when riding around with a new Captain who had no clue about his/her wingtip location. Showed 'em the cone technique during the first walk around check.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Anglesey
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh puhleeeze!
Obviously never been to JFK! They don't have "green" taxiway lines and they don't have green centreline lights on most of them. Just blue edge lights. The faded yellow centrelines are extremely difficult to see at night and nigh on impossible in the wet.
Why is it not likely? You should know if you're an airside worker at LGW that if a stand is not fully ready, the a/c will hold short until it is. In the video of this incident, it is quite obvious that the CRJ is holding short of the stand for whatever reason, as is his prerogative.
Those wishing to offer "expert opinion" without the experience or qualification to do so should avail themselves of a parallel thread in Jet Blast where they can shmooze with fellow raconteurs and pretend they are all pals whilst moaning about the "sky-gods" on this thread who, where it is obvious, are offering opinion based on fact and experience. Here, I'll help you. Just follow this link: http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/4485...ishap-jfk.html
Bare (sic) in mind that aircraft have to follow the green taxi lines which are also illuminated by green lights at night.
...or the parked aircraft was parked too far back (not likely)
Those wishing to offer "expert opinion" without the experience or qualification to do so should avail themselves of a parallel thread in Jet Blast where they can shmooze with fellow raconteurs and pretend they are all pals whilst moaning about the "sky-gods" on this thread who, where it is obvious, are offering opinion based on fact and experience. Here, I'll help you. Just follow this link: http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/4485...ishap-jfk.html
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Europe
Age: 55
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems the discussion is all about whether or not the AF captain is to blame, but shouldn't it be re-centered a bit? The real point should be, why did it happen? That's obviously not the same thing.
There have been some posts, e.g. #163, #143, #145 and others, emphasizing that JFK at night is a hard place to taxi in. Obviously both the ground controllers and A380 PIC knew this, as did other people who might have helped prevent the accident. So it looks to me like, whether from overconfidence, routine, tiredness, plain bad luck (AKA combination of unfortunate circumstances) or whatever, people weren't being careful enough - possibly not following the rules either (about going clockwise). So there must be a lesson for improved operations here. No offence to mumbo, but that seems obvious even to a non-expert.
Also, just possibly, this may be a reason for Airbus to add zoom to those taxiing cameras - although, mind, it'd have been hard to judge the available space even if you could see the wingtip from the cam, due to the angle involved. It's a question of practice I think.
There have been some posts, e.g. #163, #143, #145 and others, emphasizing that JFK at night is a hard place to taxi in. Obviously both the ground controllers and A380 PIC knew this, as did other people who might have helped prevent the accident. So it looks to me like, whether from overconfidence, routine, tiredness, plain bad luck (AKA combination of unfortunate circumstances) or whatever, people weren't being careful enough - possibly not following the rules either (about going clockwise). So there must be a lesson for improved operations here. No offence to mumbo, but that seems obvious even to a non-expert.
Also, just possibly, this may be a reason for Airbus to add zoom to those taxiing cameras - although, mind, it'd have been hard to judge the available space even if you could see the wingtip from the cam, due to the angle involved. It's a question of practice I think.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the earlier posts on this thread, many opined that the video seemed to be faster than normal citing the walking pace of the ground crew prior to the collision and the taxiing speed of the AF plane.
I just saw a version of the collision video from AP and it seems to my eye and senses that everything is moving slightly slower.
Looking at this link, the A380 does not appear to be moving quite as fast (I make no judgment whether it is the appropriate speed). I believe the ground crew begin running toward planes after they collide. The sequence with truck crossing in front of the RJ is missing.
I just saw a version of the collision video from AP and it seems to my eye and senses that everything is moving slightly slower.
Looking at this link, the A380 does not appear to be moving quite as fast (I make no judgment whether it is the appropriate speed). I believe the ground crew begin running toward planes after they collide. The sequence with truck crossing in front of the RJ is missing.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SKS777flyer - I've done the same without cones. Observe markings on the ground in line with the wing tips and abeam the cockpit. Observe the locations after sitting in the seat.
Another method is while taxiing behind the same aircraft type observe what their wingtips pass over (laterally). As you pass the same spot observe where those marks/signs/man hole covers/grass spot, etc are on your side windows.
It's fairly simple from the seat position I favor(lower than 'official'). If I can see it in the FO's side window(R2) it's outside of the wingtip. On my side the extended wingtip line is about 1/3 of the distance above the lower screw (757/767) on the aft side of the on the L2 window.
Any doubt....stop. Come anywhere near my 'marks'...stop.
Another method is while taxiing behind the same aircraft type observe what their wingtips pass over (laterally). As you pass the same spot observe where those marks/signs/man hole covers/grass spot, etc are on your side windows.
It's fairly simple from the seat position I favor(lower than 'official'). If I can see it in the FO's side window(R2) it's outside of the wingtip. On my side the extended wingtip line is about 1/3 of the distance above the lower screw (757/767) on the aft side of the on the L2 window.
Any doubt....stop. Come anywhere near my 'marks'...stop.
Last edited by misd-agin; 13th Apr 2011 at 17:16. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, the world was a very safe place yesterday. Why? The AF A380 incident was the lead (#1) story on U.S. national news(NBC 6:30 PM).
War? Debt? Riots? Political infighting? Nope. AF A380 hits CRJ.
War? Debt? Riots? Political infighting? Nope. AF A380 hits CRJ.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Middle America
Age: 84
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was a story on ABC World News last night. It points out some things which may have contributed to this event. Here is the video (after the pet commercial)...
World News with Diane Sawyer - ABC News
World News with Diane Sawyer - ABC News
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,812
Received 137 Likes
on
64 Posts
Originally Posted by repariit
It looks like the CRJ700 stopped for a truck crossing in front of it based on a video on TV here.
There seemed a lot of activity at the CRJ's intended ramp, which led it to be obstructing the taxiway.
Psychophysiological entity
Throughout this thread there has been consistent discussion about the PIC being able to see his wingtip. Not for one moment do I think this is the issue.
The truth hinges on what that captain saw, say, 150M prior to the collision, and how he interpreted it.
The worst scenario would be that he made the assumption the CRJ was progressing normally and therefore going to 'clear'.
Did he simply not see it? Remember, he may have been really straining to see the poor markings, and concentrating on keeping dead-center on the narrow and damp taxiway.
Only an in-depth analysis of this poor guy's visual clues and thought process leading up to the collision, will be of help to finding the cause.
Lastly, I found the communications bewildering. Is there a prize for being laconic on American RT? Converting from ATPL to ATP years ago, the radio was my only difficulty. It doesn't seem to have got much better.
The truth hinges on what that captain saw, say, 150M prior to the collision, and how he interpreted it.
The worst scenario would be that he made the assumption the CRJ was progressing normally and therefore going to 'clear'.
Did he simply not see it? Remember, he may have been really straining to see the poor markings, and concentrating on keeping dead-center on the narrow and damp taxiway.
Only an in-depth analysis of this poor guy's visual clues and thought process leading up to the collision, will be of help to finding the cause.
Lastly, I found the communications bewildering. Is there a prize for being laconic on American RT? Converting from ATPL to ATP years ago, the radio was my only difficulty. It doesn't seem to have got much better.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Parabellum above makes the most interesting point of all, which is the practice of parking two RJs at the same stand. You can see the resulting chaos in this Google Maps view of Concourse C and D at ATL:
Google Maps
Jigsaw puzzle parking!
Google Maps
Although all the little sparrows' tail feathers may be inside the line, it's clearly chaos on the ground here. In one place it seems as if as many as 4 RJs are parked at the same stand once used by Delta's L1011s. Throw in baggage trams and utility trucks in a tight squeeze airport like JFK and you are asking for trouble.
The real issue here is the choking of hub airports with RJ traffic.
Here's JFK's brand of jigsaw parking:
Google Maps
No birds in this nest though - must have been a large owl perched on the terminal scared'em off
Google Maps
Jigsaw puzzle parking!
Google Maps
Although all the little sparrows' tail feathers may be inside the line, it's clearly chaos on the ground here. In one place it seems as if as many as 4 RJs are parked at the same stand once used by Delta's L1011s. Throw in baggage trams and utility trucks in a tight squeeze airport like JFK and you are asking for trouble.
The real issue here is the choking of hub airports with RJ traffic.
Here's JFK's brand of jigsaw parking:
Google Maps
No birds in this nest though - must have been a large owl perched on the terminal scared'em off
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess you actually have to know something to appreciate what happened. On TV this morning, a captain tilton spoke out on the subject of : NOSEWHEEL ON THE YELLOW LINE.
IF I am on the centerline with my nosewheel, whatever happens ISN'T MY FAULT.
I chuckled. Tilton is a nice guy...flew at American I think...mad dogs...or bigger, not sure.
BUT, we learned a long time ago at my airline that one particular gate at chicago midway, if you put your nosewheel on the line, your starboard wing would hit the fence.
So much for the : Nosewheel on the centerline theory.
There are lots of things to consider in how to avoid this type of accident in the future. One poster even insisted I was out for blood...how CRAZY is that? I don't want blood. But I do know that it seems that a plane that was at a halt, was struck by a plane moving. I cannot fathom any other physical reality. IF both planes were moving...well, we would have to take a good long look. IF both planes were at a halt, there would not have been a collision. But one was moving and that plane is at fault.
The airbus 380 captain knew when he bid the aircraft that certain problems would require unique solutions. Wingspan was part of the equation.
Certainly a case can be made against certifying an airplane that is too big for existing taxiways and airports. TV cameras or other anti collision tools should have been mandated.
Does anyone remember when Boeing considered having folding wing tips ( like on aircraft carrier based planes) for its B777? This was to avoid problems caused by a long wing span.
I saw one poster mention that JFK was an international airport and that regional jets shouldn't be there. Heck, I know of international airports that have grass runways/taxiways...its just a designation for customs or immigration staffing.
Some speak of insufficent lighting on the regional jet...I could plainly see it in the video, and assuming that the camera was not infrared or such, the same lighting would have allowed another airplane's crew to see the RJ.
We all know that during taxi, we do the pre takeoff or taxi checklist. Sadly, that can be distracting. In a perfect world, we would set the parking brake and do the checks and then release the brake and go about getting into the wild blue.
Well, it could have been worse folks...there will be lots to learn, and reconsider. Maybe a very pistol should be fired whenever an A380 moves? (kidding).
IF I am on the centerline with my nosewheel, whatever happens ISN'T MY FAULT.
I chuckled. Tilton is a nice guy...flew at American I think...mad dogs...or bigger, not sure.
BUT, we learned a long time ago at my airline that one particular gate at chicago midway, if you put your nosewheel on the line, your starboard wing would hit the fence.
So much for the : Nosewheel on the centerline theory.
There are lots of things to consider in how to avoid this type of accident in the future. One poster even insisted I was out for blood...how CRAZY is that? I don't want blood. But I do know that it seems that a plane that was at a halt, was struck by a plane moving. I cannot fathom any other physical reality. IF both planes were moving...well, we would have to take a good long look. IF both planes were at a halt, there would not have been a collision. But one was moving and that plane is at fault.
The airbus 380 captain knew when he bid the aircraft that certain problems would require unique solutions. Wingspan was part of the equation.
Certainly a case can be made against certifying an airplane that is too big for existing taxiways and airports. TV cameras or other anti collision tools should have been mandated.
Does anyone remember when Boeing considered having folding wing tips ( like on aircraft carrier based planes) for its B777? This was to avoid problems caused by a long wing span.
I saw one poster mention that JFK was an international airport and that regional jets shouldn't be there. Heck, I know of international airports that have grass runways/taxiways...its just a designation for customs or immigration staffing.
Some speak of insufficent lighting on the regional jet...I could plainly see it in the video, and assuming that the camera was not infrared or such, the same lighting would have allowed another airplane's crew to see the RJ.
We all know that during taxi, we do the pre takeoff or taxi checklist. Sadly, that can be distracting. In a perfect world, we would set the parking brake and do the checks and then release the brake and go about getting into the wild blue.
Well, it could have been worse folks...there will be lots to learn, and reconsider. Maybe a very pistol should be fired whenever an A380 moves? (kidding).
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Dartmouth, Devon U.K.
Age: 90
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In Guatemala City if a wide body is taxiing out you can't land because of the proximity to the taxiway. I think all the blame will go on the Air France pilot because he was taxiing too fast and not making sure his wingtips were clear of other aircraft. Who is to blame if you crash into another airplane, the centerline?
