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

A388 peels open a B788 on the ground at Changi

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

A388 peels open a B788 on the ground at Changi

Old 31st Mar 2017, 10:00
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"no apportioning of blame"
Wait and see exactly what happens to the crew.
squawkident. is offline  
Old 31st Mar 2017, 10:57
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: uk
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
DR UK. surely its a case of the 380 hitting the 787 and not the other way round? It appears the 787 was taxiing along minding its own business when a 380 reverses into him.
portmanteau is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2017, 01:39
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It appears the 787 was taxiing along minding its own business when a 380 reverses into him.
Or the ground crew pushed the A380 back, stopped for a few minutes and the other aircraft taxied into it.

I think the jury is still out on this one.

It could have been ATC's fault for giving clearance to push. If that diagram is to scale, it seems you can't push an aircraft from this gate without hanging an A380 wing over the taxiway. I don't see how you could push the aircraft in an arc to the centerline without reaching the next gate (C23).

http://www.fly-tea.com/cms/lib/skins...rport/WSSS.jpg
NSEU is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2017, 07:37
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,741
Received 171 Likes on 83 Posts
Originally Posted by NSEU
Or the ground crew pushed the A380 back, stopped for a few minutes and the other aircraft taxied into it.

I think the jury is still out on this one.
I don't think there's going to be much scope for debate about who was stationary and who was moving.

Saab to deploy Surface Movement Radars at Singapore Changi Airport
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2017, 10:59
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: uk
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Unlikely you would think, that an aircraft would taxi into another one...
From WSSS airport charts:" Aircraft on TWY WA are not clear of aircraft pushback from aircraft stands C24 C25 and C26 until at end of pushback." The 380 came out of C23 but still infringed taxiway WA. Ground Control could well have rightly assumed that no conflict was going to arise because C23 was not included in the warning.

Last edited by portmanteau; 1st Apr 2017 at 11:19. Reason: rethink.
portmanteau is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2017, 11:14
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 1,182
Received 17 Likes on 8 Posts
Just follow the magenta - oops - green lights....
maggot is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2017, 11:33
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Today we got clearance from SIN GND to push from C25 facing north to release abeam C23. The ground crew tells me: "The standard procedure here is to push abeam C22."

I answered that this instruction is from ATC and I want him to push abeam C23.

The guy ignored me and pushed abeam C22...

Now because the ground crews are scared of a similar incident, another one is due to happen because they do their standard stuff even when being advised to do it in a different way...


It has been a debate amongst crews on many occasions. I'm not sure why, because it's not our area of responsibility; but...there are some airports where the SOP is, pilots ask for push back clearance. It is granted. The pilots tell the push back crew they are cleared. The push back crew then receive the push back instruction direct from ATC. No confusion or possible blame laid on the pilots. We all know that to give an instruction to one person, not in the language of either party, ask them to pass it on to another party whose language is also different is a classic start of a Swiss cheese. The process creates the holes. Why not reduce them. TEM starts on the ground. I wonder if all that holy grail stuff we are force fed, e.g. CRM, checklists, TEM etc. is also in the SOP's of others in the never lengthening chain necessary to get an a/c airborne safely and return to terra firma in similar condition. The links are numerous from rostering, baggage handlers, dispatchers, ATC, engineers, ramp handlers. The possibility of someone opening up the first slice of leaky cheese is huge.
Are only flight crew the primary target of this philosophy? Is it because the majority of accidents are logged as pilot error? What about the more numerous incidents? Are the also pilot error or an error from another link in the chain. It would not surprise me to find out many other links could do with a stout dose of TEM & CRM.
RAT 5 is offline  
Old 1st Apr 2017, 12:22
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: NE Surrey, UK
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Interesting that Changi seem to think that a 787 has four engines; or was their diagram meant to be, well, diagrammatic?!
Seloco is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2017, 08:29
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 68
Posts: 365
Received 7 Likes on 1 Post
Nothing would surprise me given the way some people taxi aircraft.

In Singapore one night, I was starting up, with my nose gear on the lead in line to the bay on my right. Asiana wanted to go there, so instead of waiting, they taxied between us and the aircraft parked on the next bay. I'd never before seen a 767 wingtip up so close.

How he missed us, the aircraft on the next bay, the aerobridges, and all the other stuff around the bay, I'll never know. He ended up with his cockpit at about the right stop position, but the aircraft about 30 off the guidance line. Some words were said on Singapore ground that probably hadn't been heard there before.
mrdeux is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2017, 08:33
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Earth
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes on 7 Posts
Originally Posted by mrdeux
Some words were said on Singapore ground that probably hadn't been heard there before.
Not ok lah?
unobtanium is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.