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

Easyjet A320 and KLM B737 collide at Schiphol

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

Easyjet A320 and KLM B737 collide at Schiphol

Old 10th Jul 2019, 20:45
  #21 (permalink)  
Drain Bamaged
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Earth
Age: 55
Posts: 504
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Pistonprop View Post
Unfortunately it is his responsibility. He and only he issued the pushback clearance.
No as explained by Pilot DAR.
Or think about runway incursion after being cleared to land.
ehwatezedoing is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2019, 20:50
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Always found the 'one man push' procedure at Schiphol bizarre, single tug driver to do chocks, pins, pushback, etc etc...

Compared to the UK for example, where as a minimum you'll have a headset man, pushback driver, and a wing walker.

But hey ho, what do I know

Was at OSL not long ago and witnessed a single person tow the aircraft onto stand, chock it, put the bridge on, nip into the cockpit to do whatever brake riders do, come back down, and drive away in the tug. Impressive!
750XL is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2019, 21:09
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Neither here or there
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This industry operates at the edge of the safety margin entirely for profit or to satisfy the consumer by giving them ultra low cost flights. When will we realise aviation safety is absolutely compromised by a very unhealthy competition which now exists in this industry? We need to introduce a minimum cost per mile for flying with airlines competing not in terms of ticket prices but in terms of customer service and experience/comfort. The money should then be diverted to pay the staff better or simply hire more so the job can be done in a safer way. The regulators are asleep. Competition in aviation has reached a crisis point.
CW247 is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2019, 21:45
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 67
Posts: 3,802
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by CW247 View Post
This industry operates at the edge of the safety margin entirely for profit or to satisfy the consumer by giving them ultra low cost flights. When will we realise aviation safety is absolutely compromised by a very unhealthy competition which now exists in this industry? We need to introduce a minimum cost per mile for flying with airlines competing not in terms of ticket prices but in terms of customer service and experience/comfort. The money should then be diverted to pay the staff better or simply hire more so the job can be done in a safer way. The regulators are asleep. Competition in aviation has reached a crisis point.
Which would of course explain why aviation has never been safer
That being said, I'd consider the practice of making the tug driver responsible for everything rather daft. There should be at least one spotter (with one of those really noisy compressed air horns) to make sure they're clear.
tdracer is online now  
Old 10th Jul 2019, 21:58
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Alabama
Age: 57
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by CW247 View Post
This industry operates at the edge of the safety margin entirely for profit or to satisfy the consumer by giving them ultra low cost flights. When will we realise aviation safety is absolutely compromised by a very unhealthy competition which now exists in this industry? We need to introduce a minimum cost per mile for flying with airlines competing not in terms of ticket prices but in terms of customer service and experience/comfort. The money should then be diverted to pay the staff better or simply hire more so the job can be done in a safer way. The regulators are asleep. Competition in aviation has reached a crisis point.
And what will be that minimum cost per mile and when should be increased? It will be just a big cartel. and BTW how that will increase safety when the past few years have been the safest?
Furthermore passengers are already charged a fixed costs to use airports and their facilities.
FrequentSLF is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2019, 23:25
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Spain and Gibraltar
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Really LOUD I'm reversing bleepers needed, or do tug drivers have really QUIET ear defenders?
Nil by mouth is online now  
Old 11th Jul 2019, 00:23
  #27 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Age: 61
Posts: 5,351
Received 10 Likes on 7 Posts
Furthermore passengers are already charged a fixed costs to use airports and their facilities.
Fair enough, as a pax, I would happily pay $0.25 for every ticket, if doing so greatly reduced the chance that I would have to be disembarked, and delayed, waiting for a replacement plane, once during my passenger career. Whoever pays to repair those two planes is going to pass that cost along to me anyway. I'd rather pay extra wing walkers, than sheet metal repair technicians! Costs can be cut too much.
Pilot DAR is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2019, 00:29
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 67
Posts: 3,802
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Furthermore passengers are already charged a fixed costs to use airports and their facilities.
I was under the impression that the tug drivers and wing walkers are paid by the airline, not the airport - basically that those airport fees are used for things like airport infrastructure.
Is it different on the other side of the pond?
tdracer is online now  
Old 11th Jul 2019, 02:19
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Alabama
Age: 57
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by tdracer View Post
I was under the impression that the tug drivers and wing walkers are paid by the airline, not the airport - basically that those airport fees are used for things like airport infrastructure.
Is it different on the other side of the pond?
my understanding is that depends on airport, airlines agreement, some airports in SEA have a monopoly on the service...
but indeed you are right not all are the same
FrequentSLF is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2019, 02:21
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Alabama
Age: 57
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Pilot DAR View Post
Fair enough, as a pax, I would happily pay $0.25 for every ticket, if doing so greatly reduced the chance that I would have to be disembarked, and delayed, waiting for a replacement plane, once during my passenger career. Whoever pays to repair those two planes is going to pass that cost along to me anyway. I'd rather pay extra wing walkers, than sheet metal repair technicians! Costs can be cut too much.
you already paying for that, and is a fix cost per seat/flight, not based on miles travelled. Pushing a plane for a 1 hour flight or 12 hour flight cost the same
FrequentSLF is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2019, 02:39
  #31 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Age: 61
Posts: 5,351
Received 10 Likes on 7 Posts
I was under the impression that the tug drivers and wing walkers are paid by the airline, not the airport
I have no idea about Schiphol, but the European airport which handles my client's airplanes has airport employees, not airline staff, ground handle the planes. I know this, because we've had two "incidents". I recently discussed with the airport manager allowing us to move our own planes, as long as no one else's plane is around, and that seems likely, though a stretch of their rules. It will be less costly for them, after the rather expensive repairs which have been incurred by the airport. When we move the airplanes, we always have wingwalkers, and a following person. A few times, the airport staff have moved our planes without our assistance, and twice it did not work out so well.
Pilot DAR is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2019, 05:31
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: South Bucks
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by tdracer View Post
Which would of course explain why aviation has never been safer
That being said, I'd consider the practice of making the tug driver responsible for everything rather daft. There should be at least one spotter (with one of those really noisy compressed air horns) to make sure they're clear.
Or it could be that the industry has been living off the safety credit balance built up in earlier times. Perhaps continually improving safety requires continual investment and, if the investment does not occur or is sufficiently reduced, then the safety improvements run down like a clockwork spring.
GXER is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2019, 08:03
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: malta
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Pilot DAR View Post
I have no idea about Schiphol, but the European airport which handles my client's airplanes has airport employees, not airline staff, ground handle the planes.
Same at Schiphol.
KLM has it's own personnel, but there are 2 or 3 other handling companies.
the_stranger is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2019, 08:57
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 750XL View Post
Always found the 'one man push' procedure at Schiphol bizarre, single tug driver to do chocks, pins, pushback, etc etc...

Compared to the UK for example, where as a minimum you'll have a headset man, pushback driver, and a wing walker.
Wing walkers are optional, only certain airlines employ them.
The headset man (other genders are available) and driver are there, but airlines are starting to trial and use remote controlled Mototoks, which only require one person to operate.


mike current is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2019, 09:33
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Leeds, UK
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
actually there is a low cost solution to all these low speed taxying bumps at airports, which crop up on PPRuNe regularly.

The AI in driverless cars is superb at spatial awareness and anticipation. I can't imagine Google would break a sweat turning some of their technology into having the CCTV that's watching aprons and taxiways into an alert system for an imminent collision. Any human watching the video had at least 5 seconds notice that a crunch was going to happen. Ditto AI. Then it would just need a link to ground radio to say something like "all ground aircraft stop now-collision imminent" and sorted for very few pennies.

G
groundbum is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2019, 11:20
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Europe
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by mike current View Post
Wing walkers are optional, only certain airlines employ them.
The headset man (other genders are available) and driver are there, but airlines are starting to trial and use remote controlled Mototoks, which only require one person to operate.
At Schiphol, Towbar operations are done with a driver and someone walking belongside with a headset.

Towbarless pushing, aka the lifting pushback trucks, only have a driver who does both the pushback and the talk out for engine start. This was also the case with both KLM and Easyjet in this incident.
So both pushbackdrivers would be monitoring an engine start as well. Also, the planes were almost directly behind each other, so it would be very hard to notice the other plane pushing back as well, as the fuselage will be blocking the pushbackdriver’s view.
ReturningVector is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2019, 12:08
  #37 (permalink)  

de minimus non curat lex
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: sunny troon
Posts: 1,438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by procede View Post
Wow, being wrong on so many levels at the same time in one sentence.

The controller gave push back clearance to both aircraft. Apparently he did not realise that this Easyjet flight was departing from the D pier and not the H pier, where Easyjet normally operates from. Off course the pushback drivers could have still prevented if they had realised it, but to their defence, the view from the push back truck isn't that good.
So the 'Swiss cheese' strikes again.

I just wonder if the Crews had stated the gate/stand when requesting pushback, the position stated might have proved the necessary prompt to delay the ATC instruction to push? ATC will know the apron layout like the back of their hand.
Might improved SA of just where the stands are mitigate the threat when crews listen out on the frequency?
Easy to sit back in ones armchair and pontificate.
No doubt a new FCN has already been written....

Last edited by parkfell; 11th Jul 2019 at 12:58.
parkfell is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2019, 06:48
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Europe
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by parkfell View Post


So the 'Swiss cheese' strikes again.

I just wonder if the Crews had stated the gate/stand when requesting pushback, the position stated might have proved the necessary prompt to delay the ATC instruction to push? ATC will know the apron layout like the back of their hand.
Might improved SA of just where the stands are mitigate the threat when crews listen out on the frequency?
Easy to sit back in ones armchair and pontificate.
No doubt a new FCN has already been written....
Yes, both airplanes did use the stand number in their pushback request.
Full ATC and visuals, search YouTube for “Easyjet A320 and KLM B738 collide at Amsterdam” by VASaviation.
Sorry, can’t post urls yet myself

ReturningVector is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2019, 07:42
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 14,614
Likes: 0
Received 28 Likes on 13 Posts
DaveReidUK is online now  

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 - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.