Air France jet clips smaller plane at New York's JFK airport
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking over the design of JFK - it looks like 5 local airports have been fused by a matter transporter into some sort of board game for Titans. All that's missing is START HERE and a "CandyLand" arch over the JFK Expressway. It's a wonder this doesn't happen all the time.
-drl
-drl
These guys hit a stationary aircraft, end of story. If you are taxying the biggest airliner in the world, you look where you are going and would watch your tip clearances like a hawk.
Regardless of whether the video is actual speed, the velocity of the CRJ is exactly the same....
AirFrance are getting a bit of a reputation for incidents and accidents.
Regardless of whether the video is actual speed, the velocity of the CRJ is exactly the same....
AirFrance are getting a bit of a reputation for incidents and accidents.
Last edited by Airbrake; 12th Apr 2011 at 15:54.
IMHO responsibility lies with the moving aircraft. Someone in the cockpit needs to have their head up (no, not there!) and looking around. If the Comair wasn't parked yet - why didn't someone in the A380 notice it was sticking out more than the parked craft? They can't see their wing tips - but they can see what is ahead of them on the flight line.
A pilot who is not constantly and vigilantly aware that the "World's biggest passenger plane" is going to have more clearance problems than the average plane (up to 30 feet per side more than a 747) - probably should not be crewing the "World's biggest passenger plane."
I notice ATC had to remind the AF crew to shut down their engines so the emergency trucks could move in - but I cut them some slack on that - they were no doubt a bit shaken emotionally after the collision.
A pilot who is not constantly and vigilantly aware that the "World's biggest passenger plane" is going to have more clearance problems than the average plane (up to 30 feet per side more than a 747) - probably should not be crewing the "World's biggest passenger plane."
I notice ATC had to remind the AF crew to shut down their engines so the emergency trucks could move in - but I cut them some slack on that - they were no doubt a bit shaken emotionally after the collision.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
deSitter, the reason that JFK is the way it is goes back a few years. At the time of the original build most aircraft were piston {DC6/Connie/ DC4/ DC4M/plus all the twins} these aircraft were OK on 6000ft strips, so JFK was built with a whole bunch of runways radiating out like spokes from the centeral terminal, one end being tangental to the terminal , the theory being that wind permiting ,flights could land straight in no matter which direction they were coming from.THEN somone introduced the early four engine jet transports which required a lot of blacktop to get of and on the ground, so those runways became taxiways , thats why its the way it is today. At Heathrow it a bit different, they lost the plans in 1955 and have just been making it up as they go along ever since!
Last edited by clunckdriver; 12th Apr 2011 at 17:28.
I was in the congo line at JFK one night waiting my turn to take-off on 13R. One of the local commuter airlines was flying a fleet of modified Nord 262 twin turboprops (I think the Americans called them Mohawk 298s). They were forever calling for "intersection take-offs" and were darting in and out of the congo line like ferrets up a drainpipe.
Anyway, there was a PanAm 747 about five aircraft ahead of me and he moved forward. The chap driving the Nord 262 had not moved forward far enough for his "intersection take-off" and the 747 took the entire fin and rudder off the Nord.
"God dammit" said our commuter friend "somebody has taken my tail off".
He then evacuated his aircraft so we had passengers running around in the dark in a congo line of 30 or so wide-body aircraft. How no one got killed was a miracle.
The 747 crew did not feel a thing.
Anyway, there was a PanAm 747 about five aircraft ahead of me and he moved forward. The chap driving the Nord 262 had not moved forward far enough for his "intersection take-off" and the 747 took the entire fin and rudder off the Nord.
"God dammit" said our commuter friend "somebody has taken my tail off".
He then evacuated his aircraft so we had passengers running around in the dark in a congo line of 30 or so wide-body aircraft. How no one got killed was a miracle.
The 747 crew did not feel a thing.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just seen the BBC tv report on it - with aerial photos of the aircraft - there looks like a bit more damage than just the winglet taken off - the whole nav light area is missing 
quidquid excusatio prandium pro
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the second time this has happened at JFK, a Saudia 747 clipped a BAE 146 tail, in the early nineties if memory serves.
I'm going to hazard a guess here. The A380 was certainly taxiing down the centerline, and I'm also assuming the CRJ was stopped at his usual spot on the Comair ramp awaiting a marshaller.
JFK is an old airport with narrow taxiways, and incredibly busy around trans-Atlantic departure time. Whoever was responsible for ensuring Taxiway Alpha was suitable for the A380's wingspan, the FAA is my guess, may have dropped the ball on this one.
I'm sure they're already out there with rulers, pencils and measuring tapes, fine-tooth combing for any other spots they've missed.
I'm going to hazard a guess here. The A380 was certainly taxiing down the centerline, and I'm also assuming the CRJ was stopped at his usual spot on the Comair ramp awaiting a marshaller.
JFK is an old airport with narrow taxiways, and incredibly busy around trans-Atlantic departure time. Whoever was responsible for ensuring Taxiway Alpha was suitable for the A380's wingspan, the FAA is my guess, may have dropped the ball on this one.
I'm sure they're already out there with rulers, pencils and measuring tapes, fine-tooth combing for any other spots they've missed.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not arguing that the fault is with the moving aircraft and the responsibility rests with the Captain whether he or the copilot was doing the taxiing.
However having taxied widebodied planes where one cannot see the wingtips and having taxied at JFK I do have some sympathy with the Air France pilot.
If one has been assigned a tight parking spot it is common to have wingmen assigned to assist with parking but it does not happen for routine taxiing. At holding points short of the runway where several taxiways merge into a large pan one has to take particular care.
If someone is correctly following an ATC taxiing instruction and is taxiing in the middle of the taxiway and clonks a wingtip it is highly likely the aircraft he has hit should not be there. The taxiways at JFK are not that wide and there is little scope for going right of the centreline to avoid an obstacle on the left. Indeed turning to the right merely makes the left wing stick out a bit more.There will doubtless be questions as to was the regional jet in the correct place and if he was then it may have been an incorrect ATC instruction to use a taxiway that had inadequate wingtip clearance for an A380. If the Air France had realised and come to a stop in time before impact he would have had to be pushed back which is a major cock up on someone's part.
So although the responsibility for the accident is ultimately that of the Air France Captain it is likely that one or more other errors have been made first by others that led to this accident. The outcome of the investigation will be interesting.
However having taxied widebodied planes where one cannot see the wingtips and having taxied at JFK I do have some sympathy with the Air France pilot.
If one has been assigned a tight parking spot it is common to have wingmen assigned to assist with parking but it does not happen for routine taxiing. At holding points short of the runway where several taxiways merge into a large pan one has to take particular care.
If someone is correctly following an ATC taxiing instruction and is taxiing in the middle of the taxiway and clonks a wingtip it is highly likely the aircraft he has hit should not be there. The taxiways at JFK are not that wide and there is little scope for going right of the centreline to avoid an obstacle on the left. Indeed turning to the right merely makes the left wing stick out a bit more.There will doubtless be questions as to was the regional jet in the correct place and if he was then it may have been an incorrect ATC instruction to use a taxiway that had inadequate wingtip clearance for an A380. If the Air France had realised and come to a stop in time before impact he would have had to be pushed back which is a major cock up on someone's part.
So although the responsibility for the accident is ultimately that of the Air France Captain it is likely that one or more other errors have been made first by others that led to this accident. The outcome of the investigation will be interesting.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 62
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anybody know whether the A380 crew has visibility (via video camera) of their wing tips?
With a wing span of 261 feet it must be a fairly daunting task manoeuvring the aircraft without some sort of visual perspective reference wing clearances.
With a wing span of 261 feet it must be a fairly daunting task manoeuvring the aircraft without some sort of visual perspective reference wing clearances.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: England
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anybody know whether the A380 crew has visibility (via video camera) of their wing tips?
With a wing span of 261 feet it must be a fairly daunting task manoeuvring the aircraft without some sort of visual perspective reference wing clearances.
With a wing span of 261 feet it must be a fairly daunting task manoeuvring the aircraft without some sort of visual perspective reference wing clearances.
The smaller view on the upper part of the screen just shows the nose gear from a belly mounted camera.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: England
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Image found of ETACS, it's standard fit on the A380 but the display has to be manually selected by the crew - don't know what their company procedure is but it would have been no help in this situation anyway.
Air France A380 Taxi Camera display
Air France A380 Taxi Camera display
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston, MA USA
Age: 68
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
inexperienced crews?
Just commenting on deSitter's observation a page ago making an assumption about the RJ's crew experience level. While the Airbus crew no doubt has more total time, I have to wonder if they are likely less experienced in type than the RJ pilots. For this type of accident, time in type may be the more important metric (having a feel for your dimensions, etc.)
A lot of airports that I fly to have wingspan limitations on selected taxiways. It will be interesting to see if considering such limitations is part of the response to this incident.
A lot of airports that I fly to have wingspan limitations on selected taxiways. It will be interesting to see if considering such limitations is part of the response to this incident.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"You break it you bought it." One plane is stopped, one is moving. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out where the fault lies.
I've had aircraft try to 'sneak' by in tight spots. I set the parking brake. Makes the investigation that much quicker to solve.
"When in doubt stop the airplane."
I've had aircraft try to 'sneak' by in tight spots. I set the parking brake. Makes the investigation that much quicker to solve.
"When in doubt stop the airplane."
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: North America
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Damage Photos
Several daylight, close-up damage photos available at Closeup Damage Photos of Air France A380 and Delta CRJ Bumper Planes | NYCAviation
My first impression is the wingtip clipped the rudder trailing edge under the horizontal stab. If so, just a couple feet might have made a difference.
(Gotta laugh, just noticed photos credited to "Bart Crashley")
My first impression is the wingtip clipped the rudder trailing edge under the horizontal stab. If so, just a couple feet might have made a difference.
(Gotta laugh, just noticed photos credited to "Bart Crashley")
Last edited by BreezyDC; 12th Apr 2011 at 19:08. Reason: Added Photo Credit
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow,one little slip up(not so little for Comair obviously) and its on the www for everyone to see.How embarassing.Taxiing one of these things is an art.You just cant be too cautious in something this big.If he's on the centreline then ATC or airport management must take at least some of the blame.
Ut Sementem Feeceris
If so, just a couple feet might have made a difference.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: French Riviera
Age: 50
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAA v/S BEA...
At least there will be an FAA investigation on this one...
...a few month ago an A330 of AF has cut the tail of another AF A380 in CDG...no BEA investigation !!!!
I am surprised after this recent AF A380 incident/accident in CDG, that the AF A380 pilots are still taxiing like their A330 "cowboys" colleagues !!
(the A380 of AF was holding short of the stand without passing any info of this to ATC, A330 PIC , captain, thought it would it "ok".... and boum !!!)
may be FAA will ask info about this A380/A330 incient in CDG a few month ago... to learn a bit about the "Air France safety culture"........!!!!!!!!
...a few month ago an A330 of AF has cut the tail of another AF A380 in CDG...no BEA investigation !!!!
I am surprised after this recent AF A380 incident/accident in CDG, that the AF A380 pilots are still taxiing like their A330 "cowboys" colleagues !!
(the A380 of AF was holding short of the stand without passing any info of this to ATC, A330 PIC , captain, thought it would it "ok".... and boum !!!)
may be FAA will ask info about this A380/A330 incient in CDG a few month ago... to learn a bit about the "Air France safety culture"........!!!!!!!!
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: TWIMyOyster
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Every 747-driver flying into JFK knows the dangers of taxiing at JFK (even worse during low visibility and snow/blizard conditions). Quite a few times I have stopped during taxi, suspecting insufficient clearance (which, BTW, is really hard to see from 30 feet up, with a wingspan of –only- 213 feet, just being able to see your wingtip), or mix-up in the routing. Most of the time there was no problem, but twice I was right in stopping the aircraft (to improve flight safety: you should hear the comments of the JFK ground/apron controllers). Now, I only visit JFK about twice a year, but if I have already experienced this twice, then (potential) ground incidents must be (at least) a daily occurrence. Which brings me to the question of whether taxiing at JFK with the supers (and even heavies) is an accident waiting to happen.
Also, remember the A380 BKK mishap in sep 2007 .. and those guys were (home turf)Thai pilots and Airbus testpilots. Why are there no (legal requirements for) pilot aids to detect/avoid taxi mishaps for these aircraft and why don’t companies insist on installing them? Every two bit car is equipped with such a system, why not a $300 mln aircraft (with a similar system)?
Perhaps it is up to the (international) pilot community to start writing safety reports each time ground clearance was (potentially) compromised. Incidents and accidents are piling up (even with follow me cars and marshallers). Just blaming the pilot
is not only very convenient but also highly ineffective in preventing future accidents.
Also, remember the A380 BKK mishap in sep 2007 .. and those guys were (home turf)Thai pilots and Airbus testpilots. Why are there no (legal requirements for) pilot aids to detect/avoid taxi mishaps for these aircraft and why don’t companies insist on installing them? Every two bit car is equipped with such a system, why not a $300 mln aircraft (with a similar system)?
Perhaps it is up to the (international) pilot community to start writing safety reports each time ground clearance was (potentially) compromised. Incidents and accidents are piling up (even with follow me cars and marshallers). Just blaming the pilot
is not only very convenient but also highly ineffective in preventing future accidents.