kris
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 7:51 pm

Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 12:24 am

The guy who parked the truck, the controller or the pilot?

http://www.break.com/index/airplane-knocks-over-truck.html

[Edited 2007-12-27 16:25:38]
 
avt007
Posts: 1989
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2000 4:51 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 12:29 am

Looks like the truck was parked behind the line, so I'd say the pilot is at fault. Pretty much the pilot would be at fault no matter how the truck is parked, since he is in control of the aircraft.
 
avioniker
Posts: 1099
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2002 5:38 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 12:58 am

Looks to me like the truck was about half a meter outside the line.
Let's remember where we're talking about. In Africa it's almost never the pilot's fault.

 Smile
One may educate the ignorance from the unknowing but stupid is forever. Boswell; ca: 1533
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17057
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 1:20 am

Gotta love the guys just standing around yapping afterwards...

[Edited 2007-12-27 17:21:09]
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 1:33 am



Quoting Kris (Thread starter):
The guy who parked the truck, the controller or the pilot?

The truck driver is at fault if he was over the line. The pilot is responsible regardless. The controller is blameless unless he could actually see that there was an interference problem (unlikely).

Tom.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 5:50 am


Airplane Knocks Over Truck - Watch more free videos

00:23
Looks like the Aircraft was not on the line.

regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17057
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 5:55 am



Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 5):
Looks like the Aircraft was not on the line.

Even if we assume that, I must go with Tdscanuck and say the pilot is not blameless. It's a bit like driving a car and finding a shopping trolley in the middle of the road. Do you sideswipe it or try to go around it? If you do sideswipe it, can you then bill whoever illegally parked the trolley in the road for the damage to your car?
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
airfoilsguy
Posts: 3485
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 7:28 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 11:10 am

The pilot. He also should have stopped after he hit the truck. I am surprised he didn't hit the other truck. By the way, if it is so tight there why wasn't someone marshaling the plane?
It's not a near miss it's a near hit!!
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 11:21 am

What about the ramp folks marshalling in the aircraft? They deserve some of the blame too. That's why we have what we call: WING WALKERS.....that prevents stuff like this from happening. From the video, I saw no wing walkers. Thats a  redflag  100%. Is this Menzies?!  rotfl   wink 
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
SEPilot
Posts: 4918
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 1:05 pm



Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 4):
The truck driver is at fault if he was over the line. The pilot is responsible regardless. The controller is blameless unless he could actually see that there was an interference problem (unlikely).

 checkmark 

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 8):
From the video, I saw no wing walkers.

Since when do commercial airports have wing walkers? I have never seen any. The pilot is supposed to know where all parts of his plane is and avoid any obstacles. Even if the truck was slightly over the line (as it appears to be) the pilot shouldn't have cut it that close, and should have seen that it was over the line and maneuvered accordingly. If a pedestrian is jaywalking it does not justify my hitting him with my car.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17057
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 1:11 pm



Quoting SEPilot (Reply 9):
If a pedestrian is jaywalking it does not justify my hitting him with my car.

Only if said jaywalker is giving you the finger.  Wink
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
andz
Posts: 7624
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:49 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 1:17 pm



Quoting Avioniker (Reply 2):
In Africa it's almost never the pilot's fault.

I'm sure that will comfort the captain of the 346 that ran into the sand at CPT.
After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
 
SEPilot
Posts: 4918
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 2:40 pm



Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 10):
Only if said jaywalker is giving you the finger.

So will you pay my legal expenses when I use you as an authority on this? Big grin
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
smcmac32msn
Posts: 1661
Joined: Thu May 13, 2004 9:25 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 4:02 pm



Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 5):

00:23
Looks like the Aircraft was not on the line.

I think you meant to say:
00:28
Looks like the truck was OVER the line.
Hey Obama, keep the change! I want my dollar back.
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 4:07 pm

And if I were SAA, I'd be on a witch hunt for the passenger who was violating the rules by running a camera during and after landing  Wink

Quoting Smcmac32msn (Reply 13):

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 5):

00:23
Looks like the Aircraft was not on the line.

I think you meant to say:
00:28
Looks like the truck was OVER the line.

Sounds like an airport issue. If trucks and 737's are in such close proximity that this could even reomtely be an issue, maybe they need to re-think where they park the trucks...
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
 
smcmac32msn
Posts: 1661
Joined: Thu May 13, 2004 9:25 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 4:09 pm



Quoting KELPkid (Reply 14):
Sounds like an airport issue. If trucks and 737's are in such close proximity that this could even reomtely be an issue, maybe they need to re-think where they park the trucks...

I agree completely. No where other than South Africa have I seen such an idea to put empty trucks next to an area with high winds.
Hey Obama, keep the change! I want my dollar back.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 4:37 pm



Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 6):
If you do sideswipe it, can you then bill whoever illegally parked the trolley in the road for the damage to your car

The Pilot would never know,as during Taxiing he's following the Line.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 8):
I saw no wing walkers

On Taxing Aircraft,unless theres a doubt,why would a wing walker be present.I guess it was faroff from the stand too.

Quoting Smcmac32msn (Reply 13):
I think you meant to say:
00:28
Looks like the truck was OVER the line.

After the collosion it did move slightly over,No equipment would fall in exact the same location  Smile

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 14):
And if I were SAA, I'd be on a witch hunt for the passenger who was violating the rules by running a camera during and after landing

Why is it illegal.

regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
smcmac32msn
Posts: 1661
Joined: Thu May 13, 2004 9:25 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 4:56 pm



Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 16):

After the collosion it did move slightly over,No equipment would fall in exact the same location

Look at the tires on back at :22 and :28. They are in the same spot in comparison to the carts on the left side of the trailer. To see what I mean, end the video and click on the timebar to get to those points. Also at :28 you'll see the trailer is now at a slight angle in the direction of the travel of the aircraft. The trailer actually pushed farther towards the line (safe side) after being struck.
Hey Obama, keep the change! I want my dollar back.
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:09 pm



Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 16):
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 14):
And if I were SAA, I'd be on a witch hunt for the passenger who was violating the rules by running a camera during and after landing

Why is it illegal.

regds
MEL

Well, here in the 'states, it's illegal (electronic equipment being operated during landing and before shutdown is a no-no, as is ignoring directions from crew members, who specifically instruct you as a passenger to discontinue usage of all portable electronic equipment before final descent). I can't speak for other localities, but I'm sure that airlines have blanket rules that cover these situations.

It's legal if you're a private pilot, it's on board the aircraft that you're piloting, and you, as PIC, have taken "reasonable" precautions to ensure that the electronic device being used will not cause harmul interference. I won't delve too much deeper into that, as we have had ad nauseum conversations in tech ops about camera usage in-flight  Smile
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 8:13 pm

Out here no restrictions on Photography in flight.

On the Video.....I find it difficult to believe that clearence between taxi markings & equipment staging areas to be a few inches.it would normally be 2-3 feet.

regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 8:20 pm



Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 19):
Out here no restrictions on Photography in flight.

It's not really a restriction on photography, it's a restriction on portable electronic device usage  Smile

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 19):
I find it difficult to believe that clearence between taxi markings & equipment staging areas to be a few inches.it would normally be 2-3 feet.

It is my opinion that even 2-3 feet isn't enough when you're trying to maintain clearance between trucks and airplanes  Sad
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
 
soon7x7
Posts: 2267
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 10:51 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:27 pm

No Christmas bonuses this year!
 
kris
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2006 7:51 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:34 pm

Can open, worms everywhere.....

How much would that little dent cost to fix???
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:46 pm



Quoting SEPilot (Reply 9):
Since when do commercial airports have wing walkers? I have never seen any.

What rock have you been under?! Every airport I have flown in has had wing walkers when an aircraft arrives at the gate AND at pushback.

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 16):
why would a wing walker be present

For obvious reasons...to make sure the wings are cleared while taxiing into the gate.

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 16):
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 14):
And if I were SAA, I'd be on a witch hunt for the passenger who was violating the rules by running a camera during and after landing

Why is it illegal.

I was wondering the same thing....

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 18):
Well, here in the 'states, it's illegal (electronic equipment being operated during landing and before shutdown is a no-no, as is ignoring directions from crew members, who specifically instruct you as a passenger to discontinue usage of all portable electronic equipment before final descent).

That's not exactly true......  wink 
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17057
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 11:04 pm



Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 16):
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 14):
And if I were SAA, I'd be on a witch hunt for the passenger who was violating the rules by running a camera during and after landing

Why is it illegal.

Illegal to use electronics during take-off, landing and taxi in the US (the exception normally being cell phones after landing). More to the point a camera can become quite a dangerous projectile if there is sudden braking or a sudden jolt. Ironic considering the circumstances.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 23):
Quoting SEPilot (Reply 9):
Since when do commercial airports have wing walkers? I have never seen any.

What rock have you been under?! Every airport I have flown in has had wing walkers when an aircraft arrives at the gate AND at pushback.

Well, in the US...
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Fri Dec 28, 2007 11:09 pm



Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 24):
Well, in the US...

Yes, in the U.S.....and it's a smart thing to have.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
Analog
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:24 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sat Dec 29, 2007 12:50 am



Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 24):
Illegal to use electronics during take-off, landing and taxi in the US (the exception normally being cell phones after landing). More to the point a camera can become quite a dangerous projectile if there is sudden braking or a sudden jolt. Ironic considering the circumstances.

I find the projectile rationale to be a bit flawed, as non-electronic devices are perfectly capable of acting as projectiles. If reading the 10 Commandments from the original document is okay... well, you get the idea.

As for cell phones, they would effectively be banned by a camera ban, as there are very few non-camera cell phones on the market today.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17057
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sat Dec 29, 2007 12:56 am



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 25):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 24):
Well, in the US...

Yes, in the U.S.....and it's a smart thing to have.

Maybe so. But why don't airports around the world constantly have these kinds of incidents even without wing walkers?

Quoting Analog (Reply 26):

I find the projectile rationale to be a bit flawed, as non-electronic devices are perfectly capable of acting as projectiles. If reading the 10 Commandments from the original document is okay... well, you get the idea.

I would tend to agree, even if you normally don't hold a book up at eye level where it could more easily take off above the seat backs.

Quoting Analog (Reply 26):
As for cell phones, they would effectively be banned by a camera ban, as there are very few non-camera cell phones on the market today.

Heh. Never thought of that.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sat Dec 29, 2007 1:22 am



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 23):
That's not exactly true......

Okay, I'll bite the hook here  Smile What's the catch?  eyebrow 
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
 
Analog
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:24 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sat Dec 29, 2007 1:23 am



Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 27):
I would tend to agree, even if you normally don't hold a book up at eye level where it could more easily take off above the seat backs.

I was thinking about the original documents delivered by Moses delivery, inc. (guaranteed delivery within 40 business years).
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sat Dec 29, 2007 4:57 am



Quoting Kris (Reply 22):
How much would that little dent cost to fix???

Winglet repairs are difficult, at best. Cheapest way out would be to replace the winglet and then have the damaged one overhauled...probably in the $50,000-100,000 neighborhood, I would guess, depending on degree of damage.

Tom.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sat Dec 29, 2007 6:51 am



Quoting KELPkid (Reply 20):
It's not really a restriction on photography, it's a restriction on portable electronic device usage

No such restriction out here.

About Wing walkers.Why would they be a wing walker on the Taxi track.A Wingwalker would be present nearer to the Stand.

regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sat Dec 29, 2007 2:51 pm



Quoting KELPkid (Reply 28):
Okay, I'll bite the hook here What's the catch?

Just go to www.flightlevel350.com and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about.  wink 

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 31):
About Wing walkers.Why would they be a wing walker on the Taxi track.A Wingwalker would be present nearer to the Stand.

I assumed that the aircraft was right on the path to the gate, hence the line-up of trucks on the side.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
Silver1SWA
Crew
Posts: 4455
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:11 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sat Dec 29, 2007 4:21 pm



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 8):
What about the ramp folks marshalling in the aircraft? They deserve some of the blame too. That's why we have what we call: WING WALKERS.....that prevents stuff like this from happening. From the video, I saw no wing walkers. Thats a 100%. Is this Menzies?!

I have never seen, or heard of wing-walkers meeting a plane at the end of the runway to escort them all the way to the gate.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
CosmicCruiser
Posts: 2049
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 3:01 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sat Dec 29, 2007 4:47 pm



Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 33):
I have never seen, or heard of wing-walkers meeting a plane at the end of the runway to escort them all the way to the gate

Wing walkers meet the plane in the gate area and are especially important in congested ramps. Judging from where this jet parked and where the turned over truck is he WAS in the gate area and you can see there's a set of stairs he passes before hitting the truck. From our ops here in the U.S. to continue taxiing would be a major faux pas and yes the crew should be very aware of things outside the silhouette as they taxi in. In our ops the marshallers make their observation of the ramp and get clear signals from any wing walkers before they ever raise their wands and usually the F/O will also make an assesment verbally to the Capt as he turns in to the gate. Looks like everyone is at fault and it's a very loosely run airline; hopefully I'll never be a pax on them.
 
Analog
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:24 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sat Dec 29, 2007 5:39 pm



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 8):
That's why we have what we call: WING WALKERS.....that prevents stuff like this from happening.

Why not use fancier version of car parking/cruise control aids (ultrasonic, MMW radar, lidar, remote cameras, etc.)? For several reasons, including range, ultrasonic might not work too well. However, MMW radar could be used. Put in front of the aircraft, rear of the aircraft, and at each wingtip.

These systems are pretty light weight and are relatively low cost (that is until they become certified aviation products), so preventing one or two incidents could possibly pay for a fleetwide installation of these systems. Given the cost of labor (wing walkers), the cost threshold can be relatively high.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sat Dec 29, 2007 6:53 pm



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 32):
I assumed that the aircraft was right on the path to the gate, hence the line-up of trucks on the side



Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 33):
have never seen, or heard of wing-walkers meeting a plane at the end of the runway to escort them all the way to the gate.



Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 34):
Wing walkers meet the plane in the gate area and are especially important in congested ramps. Judging from where this jet parked and where the turned over truck is he WAS in the gate area and you can see there's a set of stairs he passes before hitting the truck

Equipment staging area is not necessary near the Gate/Stand.I thought the Aircraft wingtip so near the Staging area was indication of something not right.
I think the aircraft was not on the line but Left of it.

regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sat Dec 29, 2007 7:50 pm



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 32):

Just go to www.flightlevel350.com and you'll see exactly what I'm talking about.

The fact remains, however, that either the FAR's, the airlines, or both officially ban portable electronic usage by normal, joe blow passengers during three critical phases of flight: takeoff, final approach/landing, and taxiing. I know that the official FAR loophole is if the PIC allows their usage, however do you really think El Capitan is going to love us air geeks if we approach him/her because we want to roll a camcorder during critical phases of flight  Smile . It's different if you're in the cockpit as a deadhead/non-revving crewmember...much easier to secure the proper permission  Wink. I realize that flight attendants can't be the camera police, either (although I have seen them act in that capacity before). YouTube has plenty of takeoff and landing videos shot from on-board back in the passenger seats as well...
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sat Dec 29, 2007 10:11 pm



Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 33):
I have never seen, or heard of wing-walkers meeting a plane at the end of the runway to escort them all the way to the gate.

That is not what I said. I said wing walkers AT the gate WHEN the aircraft arrives....again, AT THE GATE. The plane in the video very well could have been in the gate areas ready to be docked. That's how I viewed it. If that is the case, then wing walkers should have been present for that and this could have been avoided. Simple as that.

Quoting Analog (Reply 35):
Why not use fancier version of car parking/cruise control aids (ultrasonic, MMW radar, lidar, remote cameras, etc.)?

Because that is not what we call those people.

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 36):
Equipment staging area is not necessary near the Gate/Stand.I thought the Aircraft wingtip so near the Staging area was indication of something not right.

That's why we really don't know if the plane was right on target for the gate/stand. At the end of the video, it looked like the plane made it to it's stand and the inspection process began right away.

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 37):

During take-off and landing, I agree with you. But after landing is a gray area. People turn on their phones right when the aircraft gets off the runway, that's still an electronic device.....

Case in point to my posts is that this could have been prevented in a couple ways/suggestions: 1) catering trucks should have not been parked there right next to an active taxiway. There should have been a road that separates the taxiway and the staging area. I saw none.  redflag  #1. 2) If this aircraft was definately on that final turn into the gate/stand, there should have been a wing walker regardless and could have communicated the obstruction to the marshaller to stop the aircraft. If I am correct on that assumption, then that is  redflag  #2.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
andz
Posts: 7624
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:49 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sun Dec 30, 2007 4:40 am



Quoting Smcmac32msn (Reply 15):
No where other than South Africa have I seen such an idea to put empty trucks next to an area with high winds.

This incident happened in Zambia.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 38):
The plane in the video very well could have been in the gate areas ready to be docked.

I am pretty sure there are no gates to dock at at Lusaka.
After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says WTF...
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sun Dec 30, 2007 4:42 am



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 38):
At the end of the video, it looked like the plane made it to it's stand and the inspection process began right away.

Looks like the Wingtip would need replacement.
Personally I was surprised the Pilot did not stop after the Impact.

regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17057
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sun Dec 30, 2007 7:02 am



Quoting Analog (Reply 35):

These systems are pretty light weight and are relatively low cost (that is until they become certified aviation products), so preventing one or two incidents could possibly pay for a fleetwide installation of these systems. Given the cost of labor (wing walkers), the cost threshold can be relatively high.

Actually the cost of labor in the US is comparatively low when compared to, say Western Europe. That's why automation is so much more widespread in Europe than in the US. But of course it's very high compared to the rest of the world.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sun Dec 30, 2007 1:09 pm



Quoting Andz (Reply 39):
I am pretty sure there are no gates to dock at at Lusaka.

Work with me, dude...work with me: Gates and stands...same thing. You get the idea.....

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 40):
Personally I was surprised the Pilot did not stop after the Impact.

That is exactly why I assumed that the plane was already in the final turn into the gate/stand.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6458
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sun Dec 30, 2007 3:15 pm



Quoting SEPilot (Reply 9):
Since when do commercial airports have wing walkers? I have never seen any.

I've been a wingwalker before... more like a wing guardsman! LOL...

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 19):
On the Video.....I find it difficult to believe that clearence between taxi markings & equipment staging areas to be a few inches.it would normally be 2-3 feet.



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 32):

I assumed that the aircraft was right on the path to the gate, hence the line-up of trucks on the side.

Google earth the airport, and U'll start wondering about the pilot and the marshaller.

Looking northwards (towards the terminal)The aircraft went in from the left entrance to the apron, went to the edge at 45 degs... he definitely went over the line between the 2nd and 3rd row of concrete slabs on the apron when it happened... at that line/gap, it's only 23 meters to the safety line. the line between 1st and 2nd row is only 16 meters to the line... and he parked at the 3rd parking stand from the left... he had a good 130 meters running parallel to the edge of the apron before making that 30deg turn to line up with his parking stand... given the dimensions of the apron, and the gaps between the aircraft parking stands... I do wonder why he needed to go so close, there's no need for that IMHO... or why the marshaller didn't see he was too close... I've seen similar parking styles at airports here, and no, 130 meters parallel run to the edge is a bit too much *grin*... and no wingwalkers... *bangs head on table*

Possibly the pilot didn't stop because he was focused on the marshaller (and maybe wondering why the marshaller was telling him to go right before the stand instead of going straight *pure guess*)

In this case, if someone had to be in trouble, it's the pilot... though I don't agree in the blame game when it comes to safety.

Mandala499
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sun Dec 30, 2007 4:54 pm



Quoting Mandala499 (Reply 43):
Possibly the pilot didn't stop because he was focused on the marshaller (and maybe wondering why the marshaller was telling him to go right before the stand instead of going straight *pure guess*)

You think The Crew may have not felt the Impact.
regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Sun Dec 30, 2007 11:04 pm



Quoting Mandala499 (Reply 43):
....and no wingwalkers... *bangs head on table*

I am glad you see my point and agree, thank you.

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 44):
You think The Crew may have not felt the Impact.

Actually, when an aircraft is being marshalled into a gate/stand, the pilots are FOCUSED on the marshaller. They rely on the marshaller to see that the wings are cleared for entry. Thats the marshaller's responsibility. The pilots don't have time to look back to see if their wings are clearing the area.... Heck, I don't recall being able to see the wingtip from the cockpit, hence the need for the wing walkers. Hawk, you know this better than I do.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
CosmicCruiser
Posts: 2049
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 3:01 am

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Mon Dec 31, 2007 1:15 am



Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 44):
You think The Crew may have not felt the Impact.

I find that hard to believe judging from the impact shown by the camera.

of course they had to have felt it.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 45):
the pilots are FOCUSED on the marshaller

Actually I can say the capt. (pilot steering) is focused but the F/O IS looking at the silhouette for exactly these things. I've had more than one F/O alert me to things violating the clear zone that caused me to stop short. This was nothing but a very loose operation whether the capt. was off centerline or the marshaller was was wrong or whatever.
 
mandala499
Posts: 6458
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:58 am



Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 46):
I find that hard to believe judging from the impact shown by the camera.
of course they had to have felt it.

Now, the way I saw it, he moved the camera because he saw an impact was imminent... A few people gasped... but if it was really felt as a shudder instead of a thud, there'd be a lot more people gasping/screaming.

Well, there was a case where a 737 hit a small suzuki jeep at an airport in SE Asia (not in Indo), they only heard a thud... didn't feel much of an impact. The reason why they stopped because they knew on that particular taxiway it was asphalt and there shouldn't be any thuds and got suspicious (why the jeep was there and with no lights and how the crew missed it was a different story).

On a concrete slap apron, if you expect thuds, "another one" from the truck and them not realizing sounds far fetched, but perfectly logical. You're talking >40 tons of inertia vs a truck that was hit on top and topple... it doesn't need a lot of effort by the aircraft's wing.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 45):
Actually, when an aircraft is being marshalled into a gate/stand, the pilots are FOCUSED on the marshaller. They rely on the marshaller to see that the wings are cleared for entry.

still, the crew on each side should check for adequate clearance... but I guess it differs from place to place. Over here, they always check whenever 'close to objects', in particular while turning into a gate, once you're clear and pointing into a nose in stand, they focus on the marshaller, and "who cares about the wing"... However, on the 732 you can see the wingtip, whether you can do it on a 738, I dunno. MD80 crews here open the window and reach out to see whenever they're in a tight spot (when there's no wing walker).

In this particular incident, I find it rather strange he had to go that close to the edge, but I wouldn't be surprised if the captain was lining up at the "180 deg turn lines" of the his stand and the one before and did not check the wing clearance and ignored the marshaller until he was closer to the stand and wait for the signal to make the turn.

He probably assumed that by lining up the two turn lines, he'd have adequate clearance. One thing he probably forgot is that the turn lines would provide adequate clearance if you were following the turn...

I'd try and see if I can show what I mean from the google earth (am not at my own pooter at the moment).
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Mon Dec 31, 2007 4:07 am



Quoting Mandala499 (Reply 47):
However, on the 732 you can see the wingtip, whether you can do it on a 738, I dunno.

On a 732, no you can't. The wing is too short. If you smear your face against the cockpit windows, you might be able to see very little of the wingtips. I know this from experience, I've worked in 732 & 734 cockpits. Now, the 737NG type aircraft (longer wings), I am not really sure but I am assuming you can with the winglets installed, in this case with the aircraft in question.

Does anyone know the tail number of this aircraft, in case I missed it??
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: Who's In Trouble After This Incident?

Mon Dec 31, 2007 6:35 am



Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 45):
Heck, I don't recall being able to see the wingtip from the cockpit, hence the need for the wing walkers. Hawk, you know this better than I do

If one looks from the Extreme outboard corner of #2 Window,the Wingtip is visible.Our crew keep a cross check when lining up with the bay/stand/gate along with a thumbsup from wingwalker positioned at the sides in case of doubt due to equipment placed at adjacent bay.

Quoting CosmicCruiser (Reply 46):
I find that hard to believe judging from the impact shown by the camera.

Thats exactly why its surprising Why the Pilot did not stop.How was he to know the impact was the Wingtip it could have been worse.

Its important to stop,confirm things ok before proceeding.

regds
MEL
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests