Air France's A380 clips Comair CRJ at JFK

[dicko]

The associated press has reported that the French airbus was taxiing at a very high speed for "safety reasons". Apparerntly the aircraft was being chased by an 85 year old German women with a water pistol.

When questioned by the NTSB the French Captain said ... "I surrender".

 

[grog_sit_reserv]

Just like a French pilot always getting some nice tail.

Lol.... Best quote so far.

 

[mamba20]

Did you notice how quickly he stopped?

Yeah, hitting another plane does that. Im sure he used a significant amount if right tiller too.

 

[Erlanger]

Has anyone listened to the ATC tapes? The controller tells AF to hold short of a taxiway and AF taxied through it hitting the RJ and secondly when AF called to taxi the ground controller asked him if he wanted an escort. AF turned it down. The RJ was waiting for a gate and stopped. I don't care where the RJ stopped; clearly the AF crew is responsible for their wing. Being dark and raining sure didn't help. Btw, last October, an AF A380 hit another plane in Paris. Clearly they have issues with taxing and their wingtip clearance. At LAX it's mandatory for an A380 to have an escort. You can expect this to be implimented at JFK now I'm sure.

 

[eelb53]

Maybe it's not this simple, but seems as though when you get an aircraft with the physical dimensions of the A380, an airport should make accommodations within the movement areas before the aircraft begins serving said airport.

If you have a taxiway adjacent to a ramp area, wouldn't you predetermine what sort of clearance you would need between the wingspan of an A380, and the aircraft in the ramp area? I assume this wasn't an unusual taxi routing for the 380, and that it is typical for CRJ's to be on the fringes of the ramp awaiting gates. Unless the CRJ was holding where he shouldn't have been, it seems like an airport problem to me.

 

[pilot error]

I wonder if the airport authority is not ending up being in the hot seat. As far as I remember staying on taxiway centerline guarantees you (wingtip) clearance of all obstacles. If the CRJ was indeed parked at a marked position, and the AF A380 was on centerline then it is time to take out the popcorn.

Regarding the French criminal case against CO, you do know that some "southern-style engineering" was applied to the DC-10, don't you?

From aim-

Ideally, the aircraft should be kept centered over this line during taxi. However, being centered on the taxiway centerline does not guarantee wingtip clearance with other aircraft or other objects.

 

[Raoul Duke]

I bet only one of those planes gets fixed, and the other goes to the scrap yard. The owner though (DL) may get some insurance money.

OYS

You think the 380 is totaled?

 

[Dumb Pilot]

Maybe it's not this simple, but seems as though when you get an aircraft with the physical dimensions of the A380, an airport should make accommodations within the movement areas before the aircraft begins serving said airport.

If you have a taxiway adjacent to a ramp area, wouldn't you predetermine what sort of clearance you would need between the wingspan of an A380, and the aircraft in the ramp area? I assume this wasn't an unusual taxi routing for the 380, and that it is typical for CRJ's to be on the fringes of the ramp awaiting gates. Unless the CRJ was holding where he shouldn't have been, it seems like an airport problem to me.

I agree with you in part but just because your nose wheel is on the yellow line that doesn't mean your clearance job is done, specially since in most wide body A/C's (don't know specifically about the A380) you can't see your wing tips. Lets speculate that the RJ was indeed too far out from its parking space, still the responsibility to make sure that there was ample clearance falls on the AF captain.

 

[Dornier 335]

From aim-

Ideally, the aircraft should be kept centered over this line during taxi. However, being centered on the taxiway centerline does not guarantee wingtip clearance with other aircraft or other objects.

You as the pilot are ALWAYS responsible for your aircraft. That AF captain is totally at fault.

yes and no. In the FAA's paradise of aviation laws there's also a FAR that specifies aircraft clearances on taxiway to stationary objects (parked aircraft, buildings etc).

 

[barnyard]

It's pretty amazing how all that force spun the RJ around like that but didn't break off the tail!

I bet if it was a smaller Airbus product sitting there the tail would have snapped right off.....

 

[scoreboardII]

yes and no. In the FAA's paradise of aviation laws there's also a FAR that specifies aircraft clearances on taxiway to stationary objects (parked aircraft, buildings etc).

YES and YES, the AF captain screwed the pooch or shall I say Poodle. You are in error applying a clearance rule for parked aircraft when the RJ was clearly not parked, just stopped.

 

[hatetoadmitit]

I think a little speed tape and they both should be good to go! Looks like a "mere flesh wound" on both of them!

 

[Brazilgun]

Whoops... the pilot must have been texting his BFF Pierre

 

[brokeflyer]

its the union's fault....

 

[clr4theapch]

Needed to move the thread to this section.. sorry.. the rules..

 

[Caveman]

Needed to move the thread to this section.. sorry.. the rules..

What?!?

You guys are getting carried away with this stuff. The topic includes a foreign carrier, a major, a regional, domestic ops, safety, etc, etc and it's a big news story involving aviation and JFK. Why would you move it just because it has the words "Air France" in it? Use some common sense.

 

[clr4theapch]

If you really think you can do better.. step up to the plate sir... until your on this side of the screen.. and volunteer your time.. just be a member and enjoy the site.. I don't tell you how to fly your airplane....

 

[pair_of_pratts]

Pics

A380 Wing Tip
CRJ Tail Side View
CRJ Tail Front View

 

[Redan]

It looks like more damage was done to the 380 than the rj. sounds like the rj guys should be getting "A380 Killer" stickers. Ill bet the rj could have flown after the accident- the 380, not so much.

The RJ could have flown? That's sarcasm right?

 

[CaptJax]

JFK Runway Collision - Dangers On The Ground

JFK runway collision spotlights dangers on the ground
By Alan Levin, USA TODAY

The violent collision Monday night between a double-decker Airbus A380 and a regional jet at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport is a sobering reminder that the ground can be a dangerous place for an airliner.

Air France Flight 7, flying the largest passenger plane in the world, was taxiing toward takeoff at 8:08 p.m. when its left wing struck the tail of a Comair jet, hitting with such force that it spun the small jet around like a top. The collision was captured on video.

"Roll the emergency trucks at Mike," one of the Comair pilots radioed moments after the collision, identifying his location at taxiway Mike. "We've been hit by Air France."

None of the passengers on board the two jets were hurt. The pilots on Comair Flight 6293 ordered passengers to make an emergency exit on the tarmac and called for fire trucks, Federal Aviation Administration spokesman Jim Peters says.

The violence of the collision, which appears to have been capable of causing serious damage, indicates that the event needs to be taken seriously, aviation safety experts say.

"This was a significant collision that clearly has safety implications," Bill Voss, president of the non-profit Flight Safety Foundation, says.
The NTSB is investigating the collision, spokesman Keith Holloway says.
The potential for accidents on the ground has gotten a great deal of attention from the National Transportation Safety Board during the past decade. The agency has issued numerous recommendations calling for improved safety measures to prevent aircraft from colliding on runways. Several recent investigations have focused on planes that skidded off runways after botched takeoff or landing attempts.

While accidents on airport taxiways — where jets are moving at more moderate speeds — have not been as big an issue, the impact at JFK illustrates that the broader issue of ground safety requires continued attention, Voss says.

"You could have ended up rupturing a fuel tank and it could have been much more serious," he says.

Another issue that will be considered by NTSB investigators is the massive size of the A380, which has two floors of passenger seating and typically seats about 525 people. The wings span 262 feet, which is 50 feet wider than the next largest jet, the Boeing 747-400.

The FAA had certified the A380 to operate on JFK's 75-foot wide taxiways, but it is reasonable to ask whether the congested airport's dimensions are adequate for the massive plane, aviation safety consultant John Cox says.
Cox says pilots have to rely on the safety of airport layouts to ensure that they don't clip other planes because they frequently can't even see their wing tips.

"It's very difficult to judge, particularly in a wide body aircraft, how far away you are from objects," Cox says.

 

[wmuflyguy]

Has anyone listened to the ATC tapes? The controller tells AF to hold short of a taxiway and AF taxied through it hitting the RJ and secondly when AF called to taxi the ground controller asked him if he wanted an escort. AF turned it down. The RJ was waiting for a gate and stopped. I don't care where the RJ stopped; clearly the AF crew is responsible for their wing. Being dark and raining sure didn't help. Btw, last October, an AF A380 hit another plane in Paris. Clearly they have issues with taxing and their wingtip clearance. At LAX it's mandatory for an A380 to have an escort. You can expect this to be implimented at JFK now I'm sure.

The intersection he was told to hold short of (E) is much further away (about half way around the airport) than where the accident occurred. Also, the intersection KD where he was instructed to give way to traffic was further ahead to (1/2 mile or so). Didn't sound like he violated any clearances from what i heard.