oooops, 747 ground damage
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
oooops, 747 ground damage
Last edited by Pilot DAR; 22nd Oct 2018 at 12:09. Reason: Making the title a little more descriptive
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where were the guys/gals checking for clearance/obstacles, surely the tug driver shouldn't have been positioning an aircraft onto stand without extra eyes keeping watch for incidents just such as this?
-RP
-RP
Having batmen around when entering or exiting a stand is far from mandatory in all places. Ask me to do you a risk analysis of single-man towing, and I'll make it look just fine for the authorities and airline to approve, proving the risk is equal to that of a multi-person operation given the introduction of certain procedures. .And when the inevitable happens, the beancounters will say was still cheaper than the manpower which would otherwise have been spent, and the investigation will probably tell the accident would have happened regardless of whether a bloke with a wand was flapping his arms around or not.
Paxing All Over The World
Looking at the speed, I thought the video had been speeded up to run more quickly, rather than the tug was going that fast.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,096
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From my own experience the tugs that tuck in under the nose gear and lift the front of the aircraft clear of the ground do taxi faster than tugs using a tow bar, FRA was a classic case.
Reports suggest that the incident took place 15/10 on one of the Romeo (cargo) stands, most likely R72 judging by the video, where the 747 was being towed - presumably just for parking, as it wasn't one of KLM's Combis.
It doesn't look like stand housekeeping has a high priority at Schiphol.
It doesn't look like stand housekeeping has a high priority at Schiphol.
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: KSFO
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there likely damage to the engine itself, or just the nacelle/inlet? Obviously the engine will get a full inspection/borescope either way. What requirements are there on the airframe, if any? Since damage seems limited to the engine pod, I assume that they can "just" do an engine swap to get the aircraft serviceable again, as I can't imagine that's done any damage to the wing or pylon. (But maybe I'd be surprised.)
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Milton Keynes-on-sea
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It does look like the Towbarless tractor (TBL) is going faster than the speed for that weight of aircraft being 24/25Kph.
However, the Lower Deck Loader at 15,000 kgs with stabilisers all down, on this occasion - wins.
No doubt whoever parked the deck loader and the TBL driver will both have a lot to answer for.
However, the Lower Deck Loader at 15,000 kgs with stabilisers all down, on this occasion - wins.
No doubt whoever parked the deck loader and the TBL driver will both have a lot to answer for.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: AMS
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunate airplane,
Same as this one https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=379989
Same as this one https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=379989
