Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

China Southern A380 Prang LAX

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

China Southern A380 Prang LAX

Old 12th Nov 2016, 16:55
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Tring, UK
Posts: 1,364
sorry to continue the drift but, I am still looking for a rationale answer to the question: "what added safety provides to initiate the after start checklist only after the clear signal from the ground crew instead of doing the after start checklist, wait for the clear signal and then ask for taxi clearance?
One reason would be that with a well-designed procedure/checklist you have two chances at getting it right: the procedure (check crew clear) and the checklist (are the crew clear?).

You have to omit both of these to be caught out, as opposed to just a single error in skipping straight to taxi clearance having completed a checklist that didn’t include “crew clear” as an item...
FullWings is offline  
Old 12th Nov 2016, 18:17
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 607
You have to omit both of these to be caught out, as opposed to just a single error in skipping straight to taxi clearance having completed a checklist that didn’t include “crew clear” as an item...
That's a very good point but relies on the item being on the checklist.

Concerning the event, could we expect to see any public report published in the future? Or is it all kept hush hush?
Kerosine is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2016, 00:51
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: On the lake
Age: 77
Posts: 659
it is the ideal tractor to handle pushback and towing requirements for all wide-body aircraft (except A380)
I'm surprised that nobody has commented on the tug manufacturer's brochure statement.

TUG GT110 aircraft pushback

My bet is on the tug being the offending operator, not the aircraft crew.
twochai is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2016, 01:54
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
G-ARZG commented on the GT110 (back on page 1).

There were (unconfirmed) reports on social media yesterday that the tow bar snapped during push back, causing the tug to subsequently crash into the nose gear with substantial force.
peekay4 is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2016, 05:26
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 85
Originally Posted by fox niner View Post
And besides, why such a hurry? Perhaps they were trying to save 20 seconds
Perhaps they were trying to be courteous to the other ramp occupants: That's 20 fewer seconds that everyone else has to look at a hideously ugly aircraft.
core_dump is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2016, 05:49
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,734
There were (unconfirmed) reports on social media yesterday that the tow bar snapped during push back, causing the tug to subsequently crash into the nose gear with substantial force.
Farcebook "report"?? What is confirmed by the picture is that the aeroplane ran over the tug, not the other way round!

Originally Posted by Basil
I think that, if you want to be taken seriously, you should moderate your language.
Perhaps if people want to be taken seriously, they shouldn't dismiss, out of hand, a procedure that would in all probability have prevented this. To hop on here, as Flarearmed did, and rip into ACMS' comments beggars belief.
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2016, 05:59
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by peekay4 View Post
G-ARZG commented on the GT110 (back on page 1).

There were (unconfirmed) reports on social media yesterday that the tow bar snapped during push back, causing the tug to subsequently crash into the nose gear with substantial force.
Looks like the tow tug had not completed the push back. From the pictures,the aircraft was not on the center line yet. Not sure whether LAX allows engines start prior to completion of push back.
Icefishing is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2016, 06:01
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,684
Flarearmed:----

Mate, I heard this myself on YMML ground not once but twice. They could not get the flight crew to look out the window and wave off the ground crew.

Second fact:- YMML ATC ( Ground 121.9 ) at most pushback locations for widebodies WILL NOT give a Taxy clearance UNTIL the Tug crew report "Clear" away from the Aircraft and off the taxyway.

Now, I operate a lot in China and elsewhere, it's not normally a problem.

These guys didn't understand ground asking them to wave off the ground crew OUT THE WINDOW, so there they sat.

In my little outfit we have learnt the hard way after mistakes were made, yes mistakes were made and hopefully addressed so PEOPLE DON'T GET KILLED.
We do not action the after start checklist until the wave off, the last item on that Checklist is ----Ground Crew clear, then we request Taxy.......very simple.

It's not rocket science, this procedure was developed because previously mistakes were made.....another Swiss Cheese hole hopefully closed.

It may be fine when you are in the Cockpit mate but it's when you aren't that there seems to be an Airmanship problem.

Last edited by ACMS; 13th Nov 2016 at 06:13.
ACMS is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2016, 06:12
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,684
Oh and another thing.......

It's not unusual to hear foreign carriers requesting taxy clearance in HKG while the ground crew are still at the nosewheel. ATC have come back and said, "Confirm your ground crew are still connected?"
They too have Eyes and Binoculars and can see....

This practice has to stop.
ACMS is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2016, 08:09
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,684
Yes that happens in HK too.
ACMS is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2016, 09:56
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: FNQ ... Still!
Posts: 3,304
Can ATC actually see that much from where they are?
Capt Fathom is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2016, 11:02
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,684
On certain bays yes directly and other bays with cameras if need be.
ACMS is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2016, 11:08
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Mel
Posts: 60
That tug is far too small to push an A380

I wouldn't use it for anything more than an A330 safely

My guess is once the engines started the tug was still at an angle and the plane Pushed the tug
LeeJoyce is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2016, 16:50
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: EGLL
Posts: 383
"The Little Tug that Couldn't?"
G-ARZG is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2016, 20:14
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 2,639
My tuppence worth...

Speaking from personal experience when I was almost chopped into small pieces by an ATP and colleagues gripping the concrete with their finger nails when a 747 taxied before clearance and the no.2 engine went over the top of them!

We rely on you guys to follow SOPS to keep us safe.

sorry, but I do not see the point. Why wait for the hand signal before doing the checklist???? You do the checklist (you are not moving and the park brake is set) then, AFTER you receive the hand signal you request taxi.
Some A330 operators set flaps after engine start, this sends the engines to flight idle. Not particularly unsafe perhaps but on a greasy wet night, it's another hole in the cheese.


Perhaps they were trying to be courteous to the other ramp occupants: That's 20 fewer seconds that everyone else has to look at a hideously ugly aircraft.
TURIN is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2016, 20:17
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 4,347
Perhaps the Japanese custom of the ground crew lining up and waving isn't just politeness?
SWBKCB is offline  
Old 13th Nov 2016, 22:26
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
What is confirmed by the picture is that the aeroplane ran over the tug, not the other way round!
What is seen in the picture is solely the aftermath, but not the entire accident sequence.
peekay4 is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2016, 01:38
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: cheese
Posts: 49
News reports say the tug driver was treated for minor injuries at the airport and did not require hospitalization.
short bus is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2016, 03:36
  #59 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,038
LAX also use the stop and tow onto the bay procedure on some stands, maybe this occurred during the aircraft being pulled rather than pushed? Also, whatever happened to the ground crew calling the flight deck over the R/T, "All pins removed, tow bar disconnected all equipment clear, hand signals on the left" which meant that you had to wait to see the crewman on the left giving a thumbs up, where did that all go then?
parabellum is offline  
Old 14th Nov 2016, 05:07
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,300
Originally Posted by ACMS
It's not unusual to hear foreign carriers requesting taxy clearance in HKG while the ground crew are still at the nosewheel.
At my former workplace, sometimes this was done to beat curfew. Sometimes technical delays brought the departure time too close to curfew for comfort. ATC could not give the aircraft clearance to takeoff if taxy clearance hadn't been given by a certain time before curfew. The engineers/pusback personnel understood the concept, but one or two flight crews had difficulty understanding this (or perhaps didn't feel comfortable bypassing normal procedures) and we had to tow the aircraft back to the gate for an overnight stopover.
NSEU is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.