Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
777Mech
Topic Author
Posts: 992
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:54 pm

Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 5:43 pm

A Mesa E175 reg N87303 has been sitting on the north deice pad in ATL taped up for well over a month now missing it's #1 engine and pylon missing. Anyone have any more info?
 
StinkyPinky
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:03 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 5:51 pm

It was explained that it was hit by a baggage tug 3 weeks ago, employee was texting and driving. Damage was more extensive than expected (fuel and hydraulic lines) and was bought by DL's insurance company. Both engines currently removed. Sounds like a write-off.

This info is from an ATL airport manager that was giving us a guided ramp tour for the Airliners Intl Conference.
 
crjflyboy
Posts: 456
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2019 10:54 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 5:55 pm

StinkyPinky wrote:
It was explained that it was hit by a baggage tug 3 weeks ago, employee was texting and driving. Damage was more extensive than expected (fuel and hydraulic lines) and was bought by DL's insurance company. Both engines currently removed. Sounds like a write-off.

This info is from an ATL airport manager that was giving us a guided ramp tour for the Airliners Intl Conference.



Texting and driving ... good god ... the never ending amount of stupidity everywhere never ceases to amaze me
 
ethernal
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon May 06, 2019 12:09 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 5:59 pm

What a shame if it is a write-off. I don't want to lose any E-175s from any fleet... especially one only five years old. :(
 
727LOVER
Posts: 8629
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 12:22 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:18 pm

StinkyPinky wrote:
it was hit by a baggage tug 3 weeks ago, employee was texting and driving.



F I R E D I hope
"We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1802
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:21 pm

crjflyboy wrote:
StinkyPinky wrote:
It was explained that it was hit by a baggage tug 3 weeks ago, employee was texting and driving. Damage was more extensive than expected (fuel and hydraulic lines) and was bought by DL's insurance company. Both engines currently removed. Sounds like a write-off.

This info is from an ATL airport manager that was giving us a guided ramp tour for the Airliners Intl Conference.



Texting and driving ... good god ... the never ending amount of stupidity everywhere never ceases to amaze me

Are you recommending that the tug driver be banned from driving ever again? That's seems to be your motto...
 
Boof02671
Posts: 2121
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:23 pm

If it’s a Mesa plane why would DL buy it?

Mesa and whomever hit had insurance
 
PSU.DTW.SCE
Posts: 8139
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:45 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:23 pm

If it was a Mesa aircraft operating under United Express, are you saying that it was a DL employee driving a tug that hit the aircraft?

How dumb do you have to be to text and drive on an ACTIVE RAMP at a place as busy as ATL and hit a large object like an aircraft???
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4323
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:25 pm

Boof02671 wrote:
If it’s a Mesa plane why would DL buy it?

Mesa and whomever hit had insurance


Wondering the same - also, Mesa leases those E175's from UA. United owns them outright.
 
STLflyer
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 2:08 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:26 pm

StinkyPinky wrote:
It was explained that it was hit by a baggage tug 3 weeks ago, employee was texting and driving. Damage was more extensive than expected (fuel and hydraulic lines) and was bought by DL's insurance company. Both engines currently removed. Sounds like a write-off.

This info is from an ATL airport manager that was giving us a guided ramp tour for the Airliners Intl Conference.


I hope that employee was fired. How hard do you have to hit a plane with a baggage cart to write it off???

I figured that would be like a Yugo crashing into the back of a Hummer.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10699
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:30 pm

jetmatt777 wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
If it’s a Mesa plane why would DL buy it?

Mesa and whomever hit had insurance


Wondering the same - also, Mesa leases those E175's from UA. United owns them outright.

Well if a DL employee on the job hit it and is at fault it would be under DL’s insurance...
 
jetmatt777
Posts: 4323
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:16 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:37 pm

Polot wrote:
jetmatt777 wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
If it’s a Mesa plane why would DL buy it?

Mesa and whomever hit had insurance


Wondering the same - also, Mesa leases those E175's from UA. United owns them outright.

Well if a DL employee on the job hit it and is at fault it would be under DL’s insurance...


I doubt that it is a write-off. We are talking $10-20 million worth of damage. If Delta's insurance totaled the airplane and bought it, why is United still the registered owner with the FAA?

The engine was most likely wirtten off as that is what is most likely to be damaged the most; I highly doubt the airframe is totaled.
 
StinkyPinky
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:03 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:52 pm

Polot wrote:
jetmatt777 wrote:
Boof02671 wrote:
If it’s a Mesa plane why would DL buy it?

Mesa and whomever hit had insurance


Wondering the same - also, Mesa leases those E175's from UA. United owns them outright.

Well if a DL employee on the job hit it and is at fault it would be under DL’s insurance...


Yes, it was a Delta employee that hit the plane.

Also it happened three weeks ago and they just determined that the damage is much more extensive, damaging fuel and hydraulic lines, it wasn't limited to just the engine and pylon.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10699
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 6:57 pm

jetmatt777 wrote:
Polot wrote:
jetmatt777 wrote:

Wondering the same - also, Mesa leases those E175's from UA. United owns them outright.

Well if a DL employee on the job hit it and is at fault it would be under DL’s insurance...


I doubt that it is a write-off. We are talking $10-20 million worth of damage. If Delta's insurance totaled the airplane and bought it, why is United still the registered owner with the FAA?

The engine was most likely wirtten off as that is what is most likely to be damaged the most; I highly doubt the airframe is totaled.

I don’t know if it actually written off or not. I’m just telling you why DL’s insurance would be involved in an incident involving a Mesa operated plane owned by and flown for UA.
 
User avatar
AirKevin
Posts: 625
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:18 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 7:01 pm

crjflyboy wrote:
StinkyPinky wrote:
It was explained that it was hit by a baggage tug 3 weeks ago, employee was texting and driving. Damage was more extensive than expected (fuel and hydraulic lines) and was bought by DL's insurance company. Both engines currently removed. Sounds like a write-off.

This info is from an ATL airport manager that was giving us a guided ramp tour for the Airliners Intl Conference.

Texting and driving ... good god ... the never ending amount of stupidity everywhere never ceases to amaze me

Don't even get me started on that. As a truck driver, I've lost track of how many times I've seen people text and drive. If I had a dollar for every time I saw somebody do something stupid around my truck, I'd have enough money to buy a brand new Jeep Wrangler or even two.
PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
How dumb do you have to be to text and drive on an ACTIVE RAMP at a place as busy as ATL and hit a large object like an aircraft???

More like how dumb do you have to be to text and drive period.
Captain Kevin
 
ATL787
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 5:14 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Thu Jun 20, 2019 7:04 pm

STLflyer wrote:
I hope that employee was fired. How hard do you have to hit a plane with a baggage cart to write it off???

I figured that would be like a Yugo crashing into the back of a Hummer.


Actually, it might not be that difficult. Those tugs and carts are built to last; thick steel to put up with the punishment from life on the ramp. I worked on the ramp and remember being told in training how solid they were; supposedly one of them hit a big f250 or similar - went right through the engine compartment. Truck was totalled beyond recognition, tug just needed some paint. The planes are mostly aluminium and designed first and foremost to be light. If you hit it in the right place (as was mentioned above, hydraulics and fuel lines may have been hit) you could certainly do real damage.

You have to be quite clueless to actually hit it, especially considering how much they drill it in to you during training to pay attention, but I'm not surprised it did that kind of damage.
 
777Mech
Topic Author
Posts: 992
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:54 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 7:24 am

StinkyPinky wrote:
It was explained that it was hit by a baggage tug 3 weeks ago, employee was texting and driving. Damage was more extensive than expected (fuel and hydraulic lines) and was bought by DL's insurance company. Both engines currently removed. Sounds like a write-off.

This info is from an ATL airport manager that was giving us a guided ramp tour for the Airliners Intl Conference.


I'm not sure how a DL tug could hit it, none of the UA gates are adjacent to any DL gates, and the plane has been sitting there for more than three weeks.

I'm pretty sure whoever told you this is mistaken, with similar incident happening with an MD-88 a few weeks ago that ended up scrapping the airplane. This airplane in question is nowhere near scrap, and there isn't any damage to the wing or fuselage.
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 2588
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 7:40 am

jetmatt777 wrote:
Polot wrote:
jetmatt777 wrote:

Wondering the same - also, Mesa leases those E175's from UA. United owns them outright.

Well if a DL employee on the job hit it and is at fault it would be under DL’s insurance...


I doubt that it is a write-off. We are talking $10-20 million worth of damage. If Delta's insurance totaled the airplane and bought it, why is United still the registered owner with the FAA?

The engine was most likely wirtten off as that is what is most likely to be damaged the most; I highly doubt the airframe is totaled.


Well the list price of a new E175 is $45.7 million and we know the airlines don't pay list price. So if it takes $10-20 million to repair it then I could definitely see it being written off.
 
User avatar
Jouhou
Posts: 2539
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 4:16 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:10 am

Maybe employees should be banned from having personal phones. I'm not allowed to bring my personal phone with me to work for security reasons. Its a hassle sometimes, but I can still be contacted through a work phone and I'm starting to think I'm more satisfied with my life than the phone addicted because of it. Also it probably makes me a more focused worker.
情報
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 3400
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 10:44 am

777Mech wrote:
StinkyPinky wrote:
It was explained that it was hit by a baggage tug 3 weeks ago, employee was texting and driving. Damage was more extensive than expected (fuel and hydraulic lines) and was bought by DL's insurance company. Both engines currently removed. Sounds like a write-off.

This info is from an ATL airport manager that was giving us a guided ramp tour for the Airliners Intl Conference.


I'm not sure how a DL tug could hit it, none of the UA gates are adjacent to any DL gates, and the plane has been sitting there for more than three weeks.

I'm pretty sure whoever told you this is mistaken, with similar incident happening with an MD-88 a few weeks ago that ended up scrapping the airplane. This airplane in question is nowhere near scrap, and there isn't any damage to the wing or fuselage.


Airplanes have to taxi to the gate, which crossing into the ramp in ATL can be an adventure with tugs and vehicles driving like crazy
From my cold, dead hands
 
mhockey31091
Posts: 70
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 8:05 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 11:28 am

I've had an account here for a while but never have anything to post but this story doesn't make any sense to me. I'm an ATL based pilot and I've seen that plane over there for wayyyy longer than 3 weeks. I think the last 5 trips or so (about 5 weeks) I've told my captain "look over there, theres a united 175 with an engine missing"
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 10738
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:36 pm

Obviously I have no idea what type of baggage truck hit the aircraft, but it is likely that it was very heavy and very solid.

For example, in the UK, those little tugs pull up to 4 baggage carts, typically each weighing 2-3 tonnes. So the tugs have to be heavy to get traction - IIRC the weight of the battery powered versions now popular here is 3.6 tonnes. That's more than most cars / trucks. To get this weight, they are built out of thick steel plate - unforgiving when it comes up against a few mm of aluminium etc... So I can understand why the damage could be severe.
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
bennett123
Posts: 9796
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 1:47 pm

777mech

Was there a topic about the MD88?.
 
WN732
Posts: 809
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:49 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 3:33 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
crjflyboy wrote:
StinkyPinky wrote:
It was explained that it was hit by a baggage tug 3 weeks ago, employee was texting and driving. Damage was more extensive than expected (fuel and hydraulic lines) and was bought by DL's insurance company. Both engines currently removed. Sounds like a write-off.

This info is from an ATL airport manager that was giving us a guided ramp tour for the Airliners Intl Conference.



Texting and driving ... good god ... the never ending amount of stupidity everywhere never ceases to amaze me

Are you recommending that the tug driver be banned from driving ever again? That's seems to be your motto...


He or she should not be driving a tug for anyone at least for a while. A ramp is already a dangerous place, and we don't need knuckleheads who can't drive without hitting a massive airplane.
 
evanb
Posts: 918
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2016 3:26 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 4:19 pm

mhockey31091 wrote:
I've had an account here for a while but never have anything to post but this story doesn't make any sense to me. I'm an ATL based pilot and I've seen that plane over there for wayyyy longer than 3 weeks. I think the last 5 trips or so (about 5 weeks) I've told my captain "look over there, theres a united 175 with an engine missing"


The aircraft in question is N87303. Last flew UA6322 IAD-ATL on 18 May, which is a little more than a month ago. So three weeks wasn't far off.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1802
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 4:19 pm

WN732 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Are you recommending that the tug driver be banned from driving ever again? That's seems to be your motto...


He or she should not be driving a tug for anyone at least for a while. A ramp is already a dangerous place, and we don't need knuckleheads who can't drive without hitting a massive airplane.

crjflyboy is recommending "one strike and you're out" for most offense; it was a jab at his 0 tolerance policy.

Correct, that tug driver should be disciplined (if he indeed was on the phone while driving) and prevented from driving a tug for a while; but not for life as some would recommend...
 
burnsie28
Posts: 5290
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 1:49 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 4:23 pm

Last Thursday I saw the plane sitting inside the Delta hangar.
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 931
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 4:50 pm

Are you recommending that the tug driver be banned from driving ever again? That's seems to be your motto...


Well, he should certainly be banned from ever driving anything around an airport again, if he was texting and driving. Imagine if he'd hit a fuel truck, or worse, a person. At any rate, he will be effectively banned when his work history is brought up by any potential future employer. "Oh, you violated safety rules and state law to text while driving, and were responsible for totaling a multi-million dollar jetliner? I think you can find the door yourself."
 
WN732
Posts: 809
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:49 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 6:26 pm

Aptivaboy wrote:
Are you recommending that the tug driver be banned from driving ever again? That's seems to be your motto...


Well, he should certainly be banned from ever driving anything around an airport again, if he was texting and driving. Imagine if he'd hit a fuel truck, or worse, a person. At any rate, he will be effectively banned when his work history is brought up by any potential future employer. "Oh, you violated safety rules and state law to text while driving, and were responsible for totaling a multi-million dollar jetliner? I think you can find the door yourself."


Did your parents ban you from being in the house after you broke something? Honestly, the sting from being fired will probably be enough. I don't think they will do that ever again. I would guess this was some dumb kid in his 20's, who has now learned a very hard lesson.
 
777Mech
Topic Author
Posts: 992
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:54 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 6:45 pm

bennett123 wrote:
777mech

Was there a topic about the MD88?.


No, it's was briefly covered in the DL refurbishment thread. The airplane in question was N977DL.
 
777Mech
Topic Author
Posts: 992
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:54 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 6:49 pm

DiamondFlyer wrote:
777Mech wrote:
StinkyPinky wrote:
It was explained that it was hit by a baggage tug 3 weeks ago, employee was texting and driving. Damage was more extensive than expected (fuel and hydraulic lines) and was bought by DL's insurance company. Both engines currently removed. Sounds like a write-off.

This info is from an ATL airport manager that was giving us a guided ramp tour for the Airliners Intl Conference.


I'm not sure how a DL tug could hit it, none of the UA gates are adjacent to any DL gates, and the plane has been sitting there for more than three weeks.

I'm pretty sure whoever told you this is mistaken, with similar incident happening with an MD-88 a few weeks ago that ended up scrapping the airplane. This airplane in question is nowhere near scrap, and there isn't any damage to the wing or fuselage.


Airplanes have to taxi to the gate, which crossing into the ramp in ATL can be an adventure with tugs and vehicles driving like crazy


If it happened taxiing to the gate, you can bet the pax on the plane would have had the news out there ASAP, and that would have been the engine that would be running as well. It would have been catastrophic.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1802
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 7:20 pm

Aptivaboy wrote:
Are you recommending that the tug driver be banned from driving ever again? That's seems to be your motto...


Well, he should certainly be banned from ever driving anything around an airport again, if he was texting and driving. Imagine if he'd hit a fuel truck, or worse, a person. At any rate, he will be effectively banned when his work history is brought up by any potential future employer. "Oh, you violated safety rules and state law to text while driving, and were responsible for totaling a multi-million dollar jetliner? I think you can find the door yourself."

It appears the jet has not been totaled; comments are mixed on this.

Do you really think that the tug driver was breaking a state law? Let's see...
The Hands-Free Georgia Act (HB 673, Official Code of Georgia Section 40-6-241) only applies to roads on which the Georgia's Governor's Office of Highway Safety has jurisdiction; namely, open roads that are commonly-referred to as "highways". As such, any roads contained within the perimeter of the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport are not subject to said law.
Any hypothetical violation of HB 673 would not be considered a Moving Violation and would not be on one's Driving Record.
So, no, no State Law was broken. I don't know what kind of laws/rules ATL has for on-airport drivers though; it might have been a safety violation under ATL's rules, but that might not apply at other airports.
 
sandyb123
Posts: 965
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 9:29 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 7:28 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
Aptivaboy wrote:
Are you recommending that the tug driver be banned from driving ever again? That's seems to be your motto...


Well, he should certainly be banned from ever driving anything around an airport again, if he was texting and driving. Imagine if he'd hit a fuel truck, or worse, a person. At any rate, he will be effectively banned when his work history is brought up by any potential future employer. "Oh, you violated safety rules and state law to text while driving, and were responsible for totaling a multi-million dollar jetliner? I think you can find the door yourself."

It appears the jet has not been totaled; comments are mixed on this.

Do you really think that the tug driver was breaking a state law? Let's see...
The Hands-Free Georgia Act (HB 673, Official Code of Georgia Section 40-6-241) only applies to roads on which the Georgia's Governor's Office of Highway Safety has jurisdiction; namely, open roads that are commonly-referred to as "highways". As such, any roads contained within the perimeter of the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport are not subject to said law.
Any hypothetical violation of HB 673 would not be considered a Moving Violation and would not be on one's Driving Record.
So, no, no State Law was broken. I don't know what kind of laws/rules ATL has for on-airport drivers though; it might have been a safety violation under ATL's rules, but that might not apply at other airports.


Not sure how this goes down in the US, but here the employee will definitely be bound by some sort of conduct rules. If driving on the job is required on private land then there is going to be some sort of clause along the lines of ‘in line with state laws’ or at least ‘due care and attention’ as we would say here in the UK.

Either way this is gross negligence or as a minimum failure to follow the reasonable directions from management (rules) and should result in dismissal without benefits.

As for the plane, why is it taking so long to make a decision on repairing it?

Sabdyb123
Member of the mile high club
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1802
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:20 pm

sandyb123 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
Aptivaboy wrote:

Well, he should certainly be banned from ever driving anything around an airport again, if he was texting and driving. Imagine if he'd hit a fuel truck, or worse, a person. At any rate, he will be effectively banned when his work history is brought up by any potential future employer. "Oh, you violated safety rules and state law to text while driving, and were responsible for totaling a multi-million dollar jetliner? I think you can find the door yourself."

It appears the jet has not been totaled; comments are mixed on this.

Do you really think that the tug driver was breaking a state law? Let's see...
The Hands-Free Georgia Act (HB 673, Official Code of Georgia Section 40-6-241) only applies to roads on which the Georgia's Governor's Office of Highway Safety has jurisdiction; namely, open roads that are commonly-referred to as "highways". As such, any roads contained within the perimeter of the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport are not subject to said law.
Any hypothetical violation of HB 673 would not be considered a Moving Violation and would not be on one's Driving Record.
So, no, no State Law was broken. I don't know what kind of laws/rules ATL has for on-airport drivers though; it might have been a safety violation under ATL's rules, but that might not apply at other airports.


Not sure how this goes down in the US, but here the employee will definitely be bound by some sort of conduct rules. If driving on the job is required on private land then there is going to be some sort of clause along the lines of ‘in line with state laws’ or at least ‘due care and attention’ as we would say here in the UK.

Either way this is gross negligence or as a minimum failure to follow the reasonable directions from management (rules) and should result in dismissal without benefits.

As for the plane, why is it taking so long to make a decision on repairing it?

Sabdyb123

Even if the internal rules state "in line with state laws" or anything similar, violating those rules would still not land you a fine as it would be conducted outside of the jurisdiction of the Legal System; only your employer and/or the land owner/tenant can do something about it. And it would not appear on your Driving Record.
 
User avatar
n901wa
Posts: 459
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:38 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:28 pm

I bet it will be back flying. If the Pylon was removed, it might have been removed to be sent to a shop to be repaired. As for Fuel and Hyd lines, that's not a big deal. We replace them quite a bit. But if there were damage around where the Fuel and Hyd lines sit in the pylon, that could have caused the pylon to be removed and repaired. And that could take a few weeks depending on where it would have to go to get repaired.
As for the Tug Driver, I would wait to see if that was the true story. Not saying the post was in any way wrong but did the Airport Manager get the story right. Reason I say that is having driven a bag tug, and they way it bounces around, texting would be amazing. The first bump and the phone would go flying. Had Toolboxes and parts bounce, vibrate off a tug. Not a fun thing to drive around.
I guess time will tell.
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 931
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:39 pm

Do you really think that the tug driver was breaking a state law? Let's see...
The Hands-Free Georgia Act (HB 673, Official Code of Georgia Section 40-6-241) only applies to roads on which the Georgia's Governor's Office of Highway Safety has jurisdiction; namely, open roads that are commonly-referred to as "highways". As such, any roads contained within the perimeter of the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport are not subject to said law.
Any hypothetical violation of HB 673 would not be considered a Moving Violation and would not be on one's Driving Record.
So, no, no State Law was broken. I don't know what kind of laws/rules ATL has for on-airport drivers though; it might have been a safety violation under ATL's rules, but that might not apply at other airports.


Not exactly. Under Georgia law, a highways is defined as: "Highway" means the entire width between the boundary lines of every way publicly maintained when any part thereof is open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel." So no, not simply highways in the traditional sense but nearly any road in the state of Georgia. The real question is whether the tarmacs, taxiways, etc., are available to the public for means of vehicular travel. Well, the public can often travel on them via airside buses, for example. Perhaps not the public at large whenever they feel like it, but the vehicles servicing and often carrying the flying public are certainly there. Its more of a legal question whether the tarmac qualifies as a highway, but since virtually every other road in Georgia does it just might. It would be interesting to learn if the driver was cited.
 
Atlwarrior
Posts: 476
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:42 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 8:44 pm

Glad it wasn’t a larger jet; he could have been killed.
 
777Mech
Topic Author
Posts: 992
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:54 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:26 pm

n901wa wrote:
I bet it will be back flying. If the Pylon was removed, it might have been removed to be sent to a shop to be repaired. As for Fuel and Hyd lines, that's not a big deal. We replace them quite a bit. But if there were damage around where the Fuel and Hyd lines sit in the pylon, that could have caused the pylon to be removed and repaired. And that could take a few weeks depending on where it would have to go to get repaired.
As for the Tug Driver, I would wait to see if that was the true story. Not saying the post was in any way wrong but did the Airport Manager get the story right. Reason I say that is having driven a bag tug, and they way it bounces around, texting would be amazing. The first bump and the phone would go flying. Had Toolboxes and parts bounce, vibrate off a tug. Not a fun thing to drive around.
I guess time will tell.


Not to mention the concrete in ATL isn't the best, it'd be near impossible bouncing around in a bag tug. With the safety culture around the airport someone would have stopped him if he was truly texting.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 14550
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Fri Jun 21, 2019 9:57 pm

Aptivaboy wrote:
Do you really think that the tug driver was breaking a state law? Let's see...
The Hands-Free Georgia Act (HB 673, Official Code of Georgia Section 40-6-241) only applies to roads on which the Georgia's Governor's Office of Highway Safety has jurisdiction; namely, open roads that are commonly-referred to as "highways". As such, any roads contained within the perimeter of the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport are not subject to said law.
Any hypothetical violation of HB 673 would not be considered a Moving Violation and would not be on one's Driving Record.
So, no, no State Law was broken. I don't know what kind of laws/rules ATL has for on-airport drivers though; it might have been a safety violation under ATL's rules, but that might not apply at other airports.


Not exactly. Under Georgia law, a highways is defined as: "Highway" means the entire width between the boundary lines of every way publicly maintained when any part thereof is open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel." So no, not simply highways in the traditional sense but nearly any road in the state of Georgia. The real question is whether the tarmacs, taxiways, etc., are available to the public for means of vehicular travel. Well, the public can often travel on them via airside buses, for example. Perhaps not the public at large whenever they feel like it, but the vehicles servicing and often carrying the flying public are certainly there. Its more of a legal question whether the tarmac qualifies as a highway, but since virtually every other road in Georgia does it just might. It would be interesting to learn if the driver was cited.


It's not at all umcommon for airports to have their own "rules of the road" that, in some places, can be enforced by airport ops and/or law enforcement. I think it's pretty unlikely that the statute applies directly on the airport (putting aside public access, the airport doesn't have boundary lines and is not a "way"), but it's entirely possible that texting while driving on the airport is a citable offense under a different body of rules.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
T5towbar
Posts: 489
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:06 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Sat Jun 22, 2019 12:01 am

WayexTDI wrote:
crjflyboy wrote:
StinkyPinky wrote:
It was explained that it was hit by a baggage tug 3 weeks ago, employee was texting and driving. Damage was more extensive than expected (fuel and hydraulic lines) and was bought by DL's insurance company. Both engines currently removed. Sounds like a write-off.

This info is from an ATL airport manager that was giving us a guided ramp tour for the Airliners Intl Conference.



Texting and driving ... good god ... the never ending amount of stupidity everywhere never ceases to amaze me



Are you recommending that the tug driver be banned from driving ever again? That's seems to be your motto...


If that person (idiot) fails the drug test, and if cameras show what happened and was actually texting and driving, then YES that person should be fired.
RAMP 101........ Do not text and drive because you can get killed on the ramp if you do not pay attention at all times. "Keep your head on a swivel at all times!"

BTW: a baggage tug can do a lot of damage to an engine. Most baggage tugs (especially the ones made by TUG - a company IIRC in GA that manufactures them) have a large metal and heavy shield in front of the engine to protect it from frontal damage. The shield covers the whole front end of the tug and once it hits something like an aircraft engine, depending on the speed of the impact, it can cause major damage. Why was that person so close to the engine in the first place? I don't know where the impact was, but usually if loading or unloading, the only piece of equipment that close to an E-Jet engine is a belt loader.
A comment from an Ex CON: Work Hard.....Fly Standby!
 
alasizon
Posts: 2602
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Sat Jun 22, 2019 2:20 am

From what I'm hearing, Mesa put the plane in short term storage but is intending to repair it. That being said, it looks like they have cannibalized it for parts for other aircraft (in typical Mesa style) as the #2 engine has been removed as well despite all damage being on the #1 engine side.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
Boof02671
Posts: 2121
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Sat Jun 22, 2019 3:42 am

I worked at LGA, CLT, TPA and PHL, the airport police can and will give you tickets and it does go on your driver’s license.
 
silentbob
Posts: 1613
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 1:26 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Sat Jun 22, 2019 4:11 am

727LOVER wrote:
StinkyPinky wrote:
it was hit by a baggage tug 3 weeks ago, employee was texting and driving.



F I R E D I hope


I really don't understand why some people need to hope for the worst for other people. I'm not going to defend the guy that was texting and driving, but why would anyone hope for the guy to be fired? This is something that presumably had no impact on you or your life, yet you feel the need to publicly call for them to lose their job. People screw up all the time, most people do it at some point in their life. Even if you have no empathy, there's still no need to call for his job. That's between him and his employer.
 
bennett123
Posts: 9796
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Sat Jun 22, 2019 7:45 am

On the basis that the report is correct;

He was driving a company vehicle without due care and attention, this result in a crash and major damage.

If he was a truck driver, would you expect him to be fired.

I sure would.
 
n757kw
Posts: 447
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 3:08 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Sat Jun 22, 2019 8:31 am

One airline I worked for, if you hit a plane you turned over your airport badge, took a drug test, and about 90% of the time you were fired.

The City of Atlanta Police Department handles policing of the airport. I found the following on the airport website:

https://www.atl.com/wp-content/uploads/ ... t-2018.pdf

2 tidbits in reference to the issues discussed in the post.

The ordinances regulating ATL are contained in Chapter 22 of the Code of Ordinances of the City
of Atlanta, Georgia. Violations of any such ordinances may result in citations from the Atlanta
Police Department and an appearance in a court of law to answer the charges contained in the
citation. All workers must abide by the traffic rules set forth in Atlanta City Code Section 22-182,
which are expressly incorporated herein by reference.

No vehicle operator shall use a hand held wireless telecommunications device while
driving or operating a vehicle. “Wireless communication device” generally refers
to a cell phone but includes all devices used to initiate or receive communications,
information, or data. Such as personal digital assistants (PDAs), stand-alone
computers, tablets, iPads, and global positioning systems (GPS).

N757KW
"What we've got here, is failure to communicate." from Cool Hand Luke
 
amcnd
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 4:19 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Sat Jun 22, 2019 4:25 pm

Just passed it today. It still has 1 engine on it. The other is off and the pylon is off..
 
777Mech
Topic Author
Posts: 992
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2016 10:54 pm

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Sat Jun 22, 2019 7:51 pm

amcnd wrote:
Just passed it today. It still has 1 engine on it. The other is off and the pylon is off..


Both engines are off, they just left the TRs on the #2
 
OB1504
Posts: 3976
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:10 am

Re: Mesa E175 incident in ATL?

Sat Jun 22, 2019 9:34 pm

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:
If it was a Mesa aircraft operating under United Express, are you saying that it was a DL employee driving a tug that hit the aircraft?

How dumb do you have to be to text and drive on an ACTIVE RAMP at a place as busy as ATL and hit a large object like an aircraft???


It’s surprisingly common. I guess employees think they don’t have to be as careful because they’re only driving a tug.

silentbob wrote:
727LOVER wrote:
StinkyPinky wrote:
it was hit by a baggage tug 3 weeks ago, employee was texting and driving.



F I R E D I hope


I really don't understand why some people need to hope for the worst for other people. I'm not going to defend the guy that was texting and driving, but why would anyone hope for the guy to be fired? This is something that presumably had no impact on you or your life, yet you feel the need to publicly call for them to lose their job. People screw up all the time, most people do it at some point in their life. Even if you have no empathy, there's still no need to call for his job. That's between him and his employer.


If he was texting and driving when he hit the airplane, it’s gross negligence. He should be fired.

If it was a genuine accident, then it’s a different story.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Amchi757300, Andyq400, atcdan, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Coal, Deano969, Eimco, JannEejit, jbmitt, loubeyre, luisjumper, minilinde, NZ777ER, Rubani294, SCQ83, StTim, yegger and 239 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos