Capt might have been head down taking airways or some other paperwork maybe?

Not when he is taxiing. Taxiing requires full attention.

Exactly. On a different continent we used to have a nickname "Barachaos" for one particular place. But they did get the taxiway edge markings very right!

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....44722af3af.png

(if this was in the UK, there'd be a roundabout :E)

At Heathrow you follow the greens.
I don't understand why it's not used more, it cuts out a lot of the complicated taxi instructions you get at some airports.

Only at night, quite possible to go wrong at LHR even if you are based there, the taxiway naming /signing system is a mess although admittedly it would be quite hard to hit a lamp post.

Unfortunately for the skipper there is only one person who is ever going to be blamed if the aircraft hits a stationary object.

True. However, in a Just Culture, one would hope that all factors would be taken into account before taking any action against someone who may just be the unlucky person with all the holes in the cheese lining up. A lot depends on the NTSB findings and recommendations.

It’s easy to say that you should never hit anything on the ground, but guess what, aeroplanes keep doing it all over the place and it is not always because they’re being driven by inattentive cowboys. Maybe this accident, along with others, might lead to a review of signage/markings/charts making it easier for everyone else to operate more safely? One can only hope...

FullWings

"A lot depends on the NTSB findings and recommendations."

I'll be very surprised if the NTSB gets involved in any investigation of this event.

Yup, how often have you seen NOTAMs/company info warning not to follow certain painted markings at XXX,YYY, or ZZZ, or warnings about old markings that were supposed to be painted out with a bucket of black paint but are actually still visible/prominent in certain lighting and weather conditions?..I certainly remember one airport where we always arrived in the dark and the reminder was always issued by P1 or P2 on entering the ramp was - "remember, whatever you do do not follow what looks like the first line onto the gate.... "

Sure, the blame will fall on the occupant of 0A in the case of the OP but there are some paintwork traps out there.

"I'll be very surprised if the NTSB gets involved in any investigation of this event."

I thought it was reportable under CFR §830.2, although having just read through that it would appear to only apply if they caused more than $25k worth of damage to the light (which is possible...)

Give the Captain a break, the lines (failed and obsolete or whatever) on the taxiway looks like a dogs breakfast!

I agree with the comment in relation to the COVID effect with regards to potentially being out of the cockpit for 12 months or more. Fair enough sim re-currency, line training and all the other fluff can tick all the compliance boxes, however some of us may still not be as sharp as we were, before being forced out of the cockpit last year due to COVID. We will get their quickly, however we are only human!

FullWings

The damage to the light is peanuts compared to what it will cost to repair that damaged wing.

I’ve just re-read the CFR and have changed my mind, as I missed the generic criterion while concentrating on specific ones. It says any aircraft accident needs to be immediately reported, and defines an accident as:

It certainly looks like substantial damage to the wing, so unless I’m interpreting it wrongly (not impossible as I’ve already done just that) there should have been a notification filed to the NTSB, unless anyone knows to the contrary?

FullWings

"It certainly looks like substantial damage to the wing, so unless I’m interpreting it wrongly (not impossible as I’ve already done just that) there should have been a notification filed to the NTSB, unless anyone knows to the contrary?"

Some perhaps understandable confusion here.

Yes, the damage to the 737 will almost certainly be classed as substantial.

Yes, that will therefore qualify the incident as a notifiable (to the NTSB) event, as it no doubt has been.

But neither of those necessarily implies that the NTSB will conduct an investigation (though AAL and the DFW airport authorities almost certainly will). Nor have some similar events in the past.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....668fdc9236.jpg

Word @ AA is that this airplane will be parted out.

Avman

I would also add the airport (in)experience. If this was say an LAX, LGA or MIA based crew with little experience flying out of the "Master Base", I can see this being a factor too.

Thank you for your comment, JH 870. I've thought about what you said.
There is a vague line between 'accident' and 'negligent'.
Let's hope his/her boss decides it's your side of the line, rather than mine.

Deepinsider

"There is a vague line between 'accident' and 'negligent'."

The line between nouns and adjectives, perhaps ?

FullWings

Why on earth would center and edge lines be painted identical or even similar colors? It seems intuitive that obstacles should be clearly marked as they are in post 43 above. For that matter, I'd think that such markings should be standardized, at least nationally and preferably worldwide to eliminate any confusion.

The taxiway centrelines are painted like that because there are international standards. Some of the other markings on aprons are rather less standardised, however.

I taxied around DFW last week and I didn't have an issue with the taxi centerline and edge markings. I don't recall the edge markings to be an issue in DFW. I'd wish AA would revisit the "before takeoff" checklist and eliminate the heads-down time (at least on the Airbus side - can't speak for the 73).

I hope one day taxiline colo(u)rs are invented that are visible at night especially when it's rainy.