Japan Airlines flight on fire

Cherokee_Cruiser said:
Did they even know about a Dash 8?


In the Linate disaster, everyone went for the MD83. They didn’t even know a Corpie was burning until a good while later. It was said had emergency services reached them in time, some in the Corpie would have survived.


In this case, you see a long streak of fire behind an A350. My thought if I was on scene would be that this whole flaming trail IS the A350.
Click to expand...

Fire trucks responded to the Dash-8 because there wasn’t just fire on the ground, there was obvious structure/wreckage of some kind burning at the point of impact. Even if a two aircraft collision wasn’t immediately known (it may or may not have, based on what information the trucks were dispatched with by tower), but it would have become obvious pretty quick that there were two distinct wreckage scenes.

Skywest 5569 was thought to have departed before USAir 1493 even landed at LAX, so that one too wasn’t immediately known to be a ground collision.
 
Not sure how much the plane moved after the contact but pretty damn far away from the hold short line

8BFB5471-66A5-4EC5-823A-5C38D0176FCD.jpeg
 
Not sure the veracity of it but there is a purported ATC transcript going around that has the JAL reading back a landing clearance for company and the CG definitely not being cleared onto the runway or reading back an LUAW clearance.
 
I look forward to hearing the ATC transcript because from the audio so far, the CA of the Dash is screwed...
 
Every single news source (@SteveC ) is reporting the A350 was cleared to land on runway "C" or "C5"


Makes you think, if this is what they get wrong in terms of details, then what else do they get wrong in subjects other than aviation? That people just accept because it's reported news from their favorite source(s).
 
Someone who flies internationally, is this phraseology "taxi to holding point" standard ICAO? Very different from what we do here.

Also C5? Holy Hotspot Batman!
 
BobDDuck said:
The amount of ICAO non standard things that we do in the States is frankly astounding.
Click to expand...
Strike that, reverse it. I understand some things that we have adopted like line up and wait v. position and hold. Or changing break action fair to breaking action medium. This is all for clarification for non English speakers and it makes sense. But we invented flying and we invented air traffic control. We got rid of 'taxi to [runway]" a long time ago and it just sounds so wrong now. "34R at C5 taxi... " is a lot more informative and forceful with less verbiage than "taxi to hold point c5..."
 
I’m not sure I agree about that being better, if you say “taxi to hold point C5” that specifically eliminates any use of the runway number other than in the takeoff/LUAW clearance which seems like it might reduce the chances of confirmation bias where someone is expecting a clearance to enter the runway
 
greg1016 said:
Someone who flies internationally, is this phraseology "taxi to holding point" standard ICAO? Very different from what we do here.

Also C5? Holy Hotspot Batman!
Click to expand...
In Brussels you taxi ONTO the runway at a holding point while the guy on your holding point taxis up ahead to a different spot then takes off in front of you 😂

First time I did that it threw me off. One thing I’ve learned is everywhere seems to have some weird thing different than the other. It’s nice having those 3 people especially when you’re tired as • and can’t understand controllers or this foreign airport you’ve seen.
 
greg1016 said:
Strike that, reverse it. I understand some things that we have adopted like line up and wait v. position and hold. Or changing break action fair to breaking action medium. This is all for clarification for non English speakers and it makes sense. But we invented flying and we invented air traffic control. We got rid of 'taxi to [runway]" a long time ago and it just sounds so wrong now. "34R at C5 taxi... " is a lot more informative and forceful with less verbiage than "taxi to hold point c5..."
Click to expand...

All I will say is that it is very rare I am somewhere and get an ATC instruction that I wouldn't get in the US, and think, "well, that's a stupid way of saying it".
 
BobDDuck said:
All I will say is that it is very rare I am somewhere and get an ATC instruction that I wouldn't get in the US, and think, "well, that's a stupid way of saying it".
Click to expand...
I got a new one going into Xiamen the other night. Got our approach clearance just past the IAF, and with the approach clearance I also got "descend as published".
 
Inverted said:
I look forward to hearing the ATC transcript because from the audio so far, the CA of the Dash is screwed...
Click to expand...
I don’t.

Even if he’s 100% at fault, it’s absolutely tragic and we are all one bad day from being in his shoes. I can’t imagine what it feels like to be in his shoes. But we are all human. No matter your competence level, spend enough time in this industry and you’ll find yourself in a situation where you thought you were on your game only to find out you weren’t.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top