24 ms·

JAL A359 at Tokyo collided with Coast Guard DH8C on runway and burst into flames

216 points by nixass 3y ago

higeorge13 3y ago
Wow, 2 rough first 2024 days for Japan..
- aaron695 3y ago
  [dead]
- manojlds 3y ago
  In a way it's related to the first event.
trollied 3y ago
If this is going to be the main discussion thread, I'd recommend changing the link to a non-tabloid news article. All passengers and crew evacuated from the Airbus, thankfully.
brunohaid 3y ago
Definitely better links than Daily Mirror out there, avherald.com unfortunately overwhelmed, but in terms of discussion: - Crazy how well the carbon fiber A350 held up given that it seems to have landed pretty much directly on a Dash 8 (RIP Coast Guard team). Looks like trading long term flammability for initial rigidity lived up to the design intent. - Excellent evacuation job, especially as it looks like on some videos that the crew was unable to shut down the right engine, rendering the entire right side unusable (severed lines given the severe belly damage?) UPDATE: they actually did use the front right exit nevertheless https://x.com/tanakamaru1999/status/1742132422005981578 https://x.com/tanakamaru1999/status/1742132422005981578 - Don’t have headphones with me and in a public space, but landing / takeoff clearances should be somewhere in https://archive.liveatc.net/rjtt/RJTT-Twr-TCA-Jan-02-2024-0830Z.mp3 https://archive.liveatc.net/rjtt/RJTT-Twr-TCA-Jan-02-2024-08... if someone wants to try and find them (timestamps towards end of url come in 30 minute increments).
- qwertox 3y ago
  Direct link to the avherald.com page of the event in order to not hit the landing page: http://avherald.com/h?article=5132b9fe&opt=0 http://avherald.com/h?article=5132b9fe&opt=0
- kzrdude 3y ago
  It's somewhat reassuring to see an actual video of those chutes being used for evacuation, just never saw it before.
- throw0101d 3y ago
  > Excellent evacuation job While there many silly reasons to force people to shutdown electronics and such on planes, I think forcing people to not have any distractions during take-offs and landings is a good thing. Over 50% of incidents (fatal and hull loss/non-fatal) occurring during landing: * https://accidentstats.airbus.com/statistics/accident-by-flight-phase https://accidentstats.airbus.com/statistics/accident-by-flig... * https://www.1001crash.com/transport-page-statistique-lg-2-numpage-3.html https://www.1001crash.com/transport-page-statistique-lg-2-nu... With take-off and descent/approach being the next two more frequent phases.
  - jefftk 3y ago
    Over 50%, sure, but 50% of a very small number. How many deaths do you expect keeping passengers from being distracted at these times would prevent? (I expect if you compare that to the number of people inconvenienced by the rule it's a terrible trade off.)
    - throw0101d 3y ago
      > How many deaths do you expect keeping passengers from being distracted at these times would prevent? As of today: 379.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
yzydserd 3y ago
Not sure why the link is a UK Tabloid. Japan’s national broadcaster has a video of the moment of impact. Impact: https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20240102_302/ https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20240102_302/ All ~400 airbus passengers safe. Coastguard plane in earthquake relief efforts hit airbus (see video). 5 of 6 passengers unaccounted for.
- pmontra 3y ago
  A longer video (still in English) at https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20240102_304/ https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20240102_304/
- aidog 3y ago
  5 people dead aboard the coast guard plane that was responding to yesterdays earthquake. The airbus is still on fire https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20240102/k10014307191000.html https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20240102/k10014307191000.ht...
epolanski 3y ago
I'll speculate: this looks like textbook runway invasion where miscommunication leads to two different aircrafts being allowed on a runway at the same time. Reminds me of LATAM 2213, which led to the very first Airbus 320 neo being written off [1]. Essentially, clearance to enter a runway has to be expressively given and confirmed in non-ubiquitous language ("Flight ABC requesting clearance to enter runway 01"). Yet LATAM incident shows how often emergency services are often unaccustomed to thorough communication (after all they do these procedures much more rarely) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LATAM_Airlines_Per%C3%BA_Flight_2213 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LATAM_Airlines_Per%C3%BA_Fligh...
- konschubert 3y ago
  it is crazy to me that all of this still relies on humans giving verbal clearance over radio. Shouldn’t there be a universal standard to communicate clearances to the computer systems of the airplanes and other runway vehicles? And shouldn’t there be a small, well-tested core system that makes sure clearance never conflicts? How on earth does all this still depend on skilled individuals not making a mistake? We got over this in other domains long ago.
  - bamboozled 3y ago
    Maybe there is a good reason for it ? Wait for the answer before giving them judgment. You might be right, but there might be a valid answer.
  - tonmoy 3y ago
    I doubt your “other domains” are as safe and reliable as the aviation industry. An automated system may be possible to make, but will require a huge undertaking to bring even close to the current safety standards, and would introduce its own safety issues
    - konschubert 3y ago
      If I step into the elevator door, it doesn’t squash me and the elevator won’t move.
The_suffocated 3y ago
Does this mean when the Airbus landed, there was a Coast Guard plane on the runway? Seems like the ground control had made a serious mistake.
- rorroe53 3y ago
  Could be a pilot mistake as well. Aircraft entering runway without clearence has happened before.
  - epolanski 3y ago
    Not just aircraft, ground vehicles have caused deaths by entering runways too.
- yzydserd 3y ago
  Coastguard plane landing hit airbus on tarmac. Edit: seems I was wrong. The airbus was landing.
  - trollied 3y ago
    > Coastguard plane landing hit airbus on tarmac. Unfortunately, you have invented this narrative. There is video of the Airbus landing and striking the other plane. AV Herald link: https://avherald.com/h?article=5132b9fe&opt=0 https://avherald.com/h?article=5132b9fe&opt=0
- aaronmdjones 3y ago
  Ground control wouldn't have cleared them to hold short, or to position and hold (US: "line up and wait"). That would have been the tower, not ground. Ground is only responsible for taxiways, not runways. The Coastguard plane was cleared to hold short at C2, but entered the runway instead from C2 as if cleared to position and hold (Edit: Or maybe they thought they were cleared to take off, but that's far less likely).
  - wlonkly 3y ago
borissk 3y ago
[flagged]
- resolutebat 3y ago
  Nope, that narrative was largely a myth. The people at the back by and large died instantly in the crash, without even time to undo their seatbelts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_1492#Evacuation_with_luggage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_1492#Evacuatio...
  - borissk 3y ago
    Hmmmm, there were plenty of videos of people with hand luggage outside the plane - surely taking this luggage was against the rules and has slowed down the evacuation. I won't be surprised if TASS is just trying to cover the story. I think it was a different Russian crash were the pilots were given state medals for saving the passengers. A later investigation found these same pilots were responsible for the crash. The powers that be decided that instead of admitting they were wrong, revoking the medals and sending the pilots to prison they'll just cover up the whole story.
    - okasaki 3y ago
      I don't see how that makes sense. Why would they say the people died instantly in a Russian aircraft if the truth was that they died because others wanted to retrieve luggage? Not everything the Russian government does is a conspiracy.
      - throwaway290 3y ago
        As a Russian I can easily envision the pathologically lying government doing this. The Wikipedia article linked above shows that there are no verified sources except government and that government also says there's no war in Ukraine. The credibility of the source is very low in my eyes. And generally remember the general effort to discredit West. If you want West to look more immoral than you, it's hard to do without looking more moral than West and this incident, if true, would be an example of people being VERY immoral. As you slowly collect your bags you have no way to know that people behind you are 100% dead and beyond help. Any attempt of the government to say it's fine is just pathetic.
davidkuennen 3y ago
It's so impressive that all of them got out alive. It's also the first hull loss of an A350. Seems to be an amazingly safe plane considering this.
Nextgrid 3y ago
I wonder if some kind of "TCAS" for runways can be implemented - once the controller clears an aircraft for a given runway, some antennas start broadcasting that aircraft's identifier so any equipped planes approaching the runway can tell whether they've been cleared for it. For planes on approach, the existing ILS antennas can be reused but I'm not sure whether that will work on the ground - do the ILS antennas cover enough of the ground to accurately target a plane that's approaching the runway perpendicularly (off a taxiway, etc)?
- t0mas88 3y ago
  Two types of systems already exists on the ATC side of things. There are red stop-bar lights at each runway entry point. Pilots are trained never to cross a red stop-bar even if told by ATC. The controller has to press a button to turn the lights off, and they automatically come back on after 1 plane has passed the lights. In larger airports with an automated system, the system monitors the runway occupancy and approach sector. If the runway is occupied or an aircraft is on final within a certain distance, the system throws an alert before the stop-bars can be turned off. On top of that there is also an autonomous version of this system that will use red lights to indicate a dangerous runway status (e.g. aircraft on approach) at each entry point. And the other way around, an aircraft line up for takeoff (but holding) will get red lights if any of the entry points further down the runway are crossed. More here: https://skybrary.aero/articles/autonomous-runway-incursion-warning-system-ariws https://skybrary.aero/articles/autonomous-runway-incursion-w...
  - t0mas88 3y ago
    I can't edit this comment anymore, but there has just been an update that the stop bar lights I describe above were out of service at the airport in this incident.
- __m 3y ago
  ASDE-X should warn the controller, not sure if it's installed at that airport
  - 3y ago
monkey_monkey 3y ago
The Guardian is reporting that 5 people who were on the coastguard plane have died.
KptMarchewa 3y ago
The fact that everyone made it out alive from A350 is a great testament to the design. Insane.
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  Eh, not really. Any passenger plane design is supposed to be able to evacuate in 90 seconds. They had several minutes (at least) to get off that plane before the fire spread to the cabin.
  - lxgr 3y ago
    Looking at the videos, the plane was literally doused in burning jet fuel as it was decelerating at high speed. I still find that very impressive for a plane built out of ultimately flammable materials (carbon fiber).
    - rootusrootus 3y ago
      I would expect similar performance from any plane, whether aluminum or composite.
  - KptMarchewa 3y ago
    Fire is one thing, explosion as the result of collision is other.
  - numpad0 3y ago
    It's one thing to demand something and another to fulfill it.
  - sofixa 3y ago
    And passenger planes are supposed to not crash themselves in the ground, but the only other major passenger plane manufacturer couldn't even get that right. So planes working as expected and saving lives is a thing to be noted.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
Aeolun 3y ago
Holy crap. That’s some news to come home to after the earthquake yesterday…
king_magic 3y ago
This never should have happened, and mark my words we’re going to see the same type of accident in the US if we don’t radically rework ATC.
- Dalewyn 3y ago
  It's still unknown if the cause was ATC mishandling the situation, we'll have to see how what the investigation finds.
- epolanski 3y ago
  You're implying this is ATC rather than human-error related.
  - TangoFox 3y ago
    To anyone else jumping to conclusions: First, please do not jump to conclusions. Secondly, this incident was in Japan, not the US. Feelings about US ATC should not be a factor in this situation. Third, wasn't there a recent runway collision (wing clipped a tail) in the US where the pilot was quick to blame ATC on the radio, but it turns out that pilot entered the runway without permission? (initial conclusions are often wrong) Disclaimer: I am a US ATC - The views expressed here are my own and not necessarily those of FAA.
    - king_magic 3y ago
      Just to be clear I’m not calling out ATC specifically, as in the people who are controllers. Rather, the entire system of air traffic control. It seems to me if we end up in a situation where a pilot does something wrong in a sensitive area that can lead to a catastrophic outcome, we didn’t do a good job of controlling air traffic. Full stop. The system is amazingly safe but clearly there are pockets of very poor control/decision making around runway incursions or near misses around the runway.
- mym1990 3y ago
  I feel like 'radically' reworking anything is a great first step in increasing errors while the new processes get ingrained. There needs to a measured and meticulous approach to reworking ATC if it is to happen.
m_eiman 3y ago
Here's a first-hand account from one of the passengers on the Airbus, somewhat decently translated from Swedish: https://www-svt-se.translate.goog/nyheter/utrikes/svensk-familj-flydde-eldinfernot-i-japanska-flygplanet-en-skrackhistoria?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=sv&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://www-svt-se.translate.goog/nyheter/utrikes/svensk-fam...
nottorp 3y ago
We really need a paywall mark. Too bad linking to av....ld would probably shut down the site for today.
- yardstick 3y ago
  Anyone here from one of the large CDN providers want to reach out to AV Herald and offer him some free services? It’s such a useful and informative resource. Too bad it’s super slow when accessed in AU/NZ and I guess outside US/EU.
  - roelschroeven 3y ago
    Earlier today it was very slow, and often timing out, from the EU too. I haven't tried again since.
    - nottorp 3y ago
      Guessing because this accident made it to mainstream news.
      - roelschroeven 3y ago
        That's what I thought too, yes. It's much more responsive now.
supernova87a 3y ago
I dare say / guess that 2 combined factors will have helped the successful evacuation effort (especially given that these aircraft for Japan internal flights are some of the densest passenger configurations): 1. Domestic flight, with people less likely to be hauling around lots of belongings, although in Japan people already bring much less onto flights with them. 2. The well-known social expectation/procedure-abiding inclination of everyday Japanese people kicking in to enforce an orderly (and no bag-carrying) exit. Others may have observed similarly when flying in Japan. They can regularly board a widebody plane in 15 minutes, whereas 30-40+ minutes for the US still produces departure delays. I am guessing this efficiency factors into the evacuation as well. Versus other evacuation videos I have seen where people are actually exiting with their rollaboards. Really shocking.
- stevehawk 3y ago
  I have to admit, I wonder how many lives would have been lost if this happened in America. "I have to get my laptop!" "where's my carry-on!?" "I think I left my phone!"
steveBK123 3y ago
This is why you follow cabin crew instructions and DO NOT CARRY YOUR LUGGAGE out of the aircraft in an emergency. Your luggage is not worth more than a fellow passengers life. Contrast this with evacuation footage of western passenger planes..
- rgrieselhuber 3y ago
  Indeed. It’s a good idea to keep your passport and some small USB drives (password database, Linux image for installation on a new laptop, etc.) on your person instead of in your luggage when you fly.
  - hn_throwaway_69 3y ago
    >password database, Linux image for installation on a new laptop Heh. Imagine surviving a plane crash. Everyone is busy calling their loved ones, and I'm busy setting up my new Linux distribution on a laptop bought in duty free, using the Linux image in my pocket.
    - chilmers 3y ago
      After six hours trying to get the touchpad working you're wishing you'd died in the crash.
- aaron695 3y ago
  [dead]
- nytesky 3y ago
  Members of my family require medication (epipen, some various pills), and I keep that along with a flashlight (in case I need to administer in pitch black) in a small haversack. I would probably try to take that with me, as I would hate to survive the crash but then have a fatal medical event in the aftermath and not have the tools. I do feel conflicted since the no luggage mantra has been drilled in for decades.
  - 3y ago
ablation 3y ago
Doesn't sound like quite such a miracle right now for the unfortunate crew of the Coast Guard aircraft, with five of the six crew unaccounted for, sadly.
- argiopetech 3y ago
  Now confirmed deceased, unfortunately.
throw0101d 3y ago
For the ATC, see: * https://archive.liveatc.net/rjtt/RJTT-Twr-TCA-Jan-02-2024-0830Z.mp3 https://archive.liveatc.net/rjtt/RJTT-Twr-TCA-Jan-02-2024-08... * Via: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868205-post57.html https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868205-post57.html 13:13 JL516 continue approach. 14:53 landing clearance. 15:01 readback. 15:13 Japan Coast Guard JA772A taxi instructions. 17:35 fire reported on 34R. * https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868237-post67.html https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868237-post67.html The recording quality isn't very good, perhaps because of the location of the receiver.
- mkii 3y ago
  Whenever I listen to these types of recordings, there's so much static and it's hard to hear the words. Is this how it actually sounds to pilots/ATC operators or is their feed actually much clearer?
  - lxgr 3y ago
    It's usually much clearer. These unofficial ATC feeds are usually captured by volunteers or at least companies not directly affiliated with the aviation industry (similarly to services like Flightradar24), sometimes some distance away from airports, which makes ATC and aircraft on the ground really hard to hear. What also helps a lot is that the formats of messages relayed are pretty standardized (ICAO phraseology), and knowing what phrases to listen for can help a lot. On the other hand, it can unfortunately also cause people to hear what they are primed for – such as a landing or takeoff clearance... (Not implying that this happened here – I can't make out what's being said on the tape myself!)
  - gosub100 3y ago
    I can't prove it, but I doubt most of the ATC recording amateurs have very good antennas. Also, the ATC transmitters are likely pointed upward for obvious reasons.
- culebron21 3y ago
  I really wonder how visible the Dash-8 was on the runway? After all, it has strobes, beacon, and the A350 has landing lights. Or there's too much other flashing lights around the runway? Or the pilots were busy monitoring the displays?
somewhereoutth 3y ago
I'd suggest that the miracle escape is testament to ~100? years of evolution of civil aviation safety practices.
- adastra22 3y ago
  5 people died. I wouldn't call it a miracle.
  - ApolloFortyNine 3y ago
    >All 379 passengers and crew of a Japan Airlines plane escaped a devastating fire that erupted after it collided with a smaller Coast Guard aircraft at Tokyo’s Haneda airport on Tuesday. That's 379 lives saved, is the number not important, or is it the ratio?
    - reactordev 3y ago
      It should have been 384. If 10,000 people die but 1,000,000 are "saved", do we not mourn the 10,000 people? Have a heart my man. What if you were one of those 10,000?
      - RHSeeger 3y ago
        If a "normal" outcome for such an event would have been much closer to 1,000,000 being killed, then yes it would be wonderful if 990,000 were saved. Sure, we mourn the dead, but we can still be happy for the saved.
        adastra22 3y ago
        Still, the word miracle would be inappropriate.
        reactordev 3y ago
        wonderful for sure, but not a miracle. A miracle would be "all 1,000,000 people survived". Media likes to throw words with weight behind things without. It's not a miracle, it's extremely fortunate. However, any loss of life due to preventable disaster is/should be - unacceptable. The coast guard aircraft crewmen that were struck shouldn't have been near the runway at all. They should have waived off to go-around or been better at ground operations to make sure the runways were clear.
mrabcx 3y ago
According to Flightradar24, https://twitter.com/flightradar24/status/1742136715253313938 https://twitter.com/flightradar24/status/1742136715253313938, the Japanese coast guard aircraft was not equipped with a ADS-B transponder. Probably because it's not a requirement for military aircraft. That can explain why the ATC and/or JAL was not aware of the exact location of the plane.
- Dalewyn 3y ago
  Minor nitpick, but the Japan Coast Guard is not a military (and so the concerned aircraft isn't military). It serves under the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism; unlike the JSDF which serves under the Ministry of Defense.
  - alistairSH 3y ago
    Curious, what's the rule for USCG and transponders? USCG is part of DHS and considered a military branch (despite not being in DoD alongside the other military branches and having a primarily law-enforcement mission).
    - manquer 3y ago
      Civilian transponders would give away the position of the craft to smugglers and others trying to evade the coast guard. I would expect they would have the ability to switch off their transponders at minimum for missions.
- throw0101d 3y ago
  It has a transponder, and previous flights for it were recorded: * https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/ja722a https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/ja722a * Via: https://twitter.com/flightradar24/status/1742136715253313938 https://twitter.com/flightradar24/status/1742136715253313938 * https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/de-havilland-canada-dhc-8-300-ja722a-japan-coast-guard/34j0y1 https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/de-havilland-canada-d...
icegreentea2 3y ago
Other sources (https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/japan-airliner-fire-1.7072315 https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/japan-airliner-fire-1.7072315) say that the coast guard aircraft was a dash-8.
- wkat4242 3y ago
  5 crew is a lot for a cargo flight actually. I wonder why there were so many on board.
  - icegreentea2 3y ago
    I think it sometimes makes sense to carry extra people to help with offloading, depending on the situation. The Dash-8 is not a cargo aircraft - it's not like you can just roll pallets on and off. It's also possible that it would do a cargo run, and then do some surveillance operations (the JSDF employ the Dash-8 in the maritime surveillance role) to help with damage assessment.
andyjohnson0 3y ago
There's a PPRUNE thread with the usual mix of comments at https://www.pprune.org/accidents-close-calls/656665-jal-incident-haneda-airport-4.html https://www.pprune.org/accidents-close-calls/656665-jal-inci... Comments get more informative (and informed?) down the thread.
- asylteltine 3y ago
  Wow that live video really puts the size in perspective. The firefighters are minuscule compared to the plane
- JCharante 3y ago
  Hmm. That is interesting. It seemed like the hose was really heavy and he was all alone. I wonder why.
nixass 3y ago
First A350 hull loss
- cgeier 3y ago
  But unlikely to be the plane's fault.
  - nixass 3y ago
    Definitely not. It's actually great how the frame endured whole thing enough for people to safely evacuate.
wkat4242 3y ago
Admiral Cloudberg has their work cut out for them again... I always love their insights (not sure if it's a man or a woman) It's not really a miracle though. Just the system working as intended, and the many lessons learned from the lives that were lost in the past paying off. As an example: due to this accident with many fatalities, the process for fire on the runway has been improved considerably. In that case the wind direction made a big difference in the number of fatalities, because it blew toxic smoke and fire into the fuselage while the evacuation was ongoing. Lessons were learned and procedures fixed. But it's still important to remember that those lessons were paid in blood. https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/fire-on-the-runway-the-manchester-airport-disaster-and-the-tragedy-of-british-airtours-flight-28m-0a2054e27fff https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/fire-on-the-runway-the-m...
- Varimpls 3y ago
  A woman, not that it matters
- EdwardDiego 3y ago
  It'll be a long while before the Admiral does, she prefers to work on reports from the investigations.
drooopy 3y ago
Jeez, Japan did not start the year off on the right foot.
steveBK123 3y ago
Yet another Japanese plane evacuation without people lugging backpacks & wheelies. Commendable work by the cabin crew and passengers. Contrast that with some of the Spirit/Southwest/Qantas evacuation videos we have seen. DO NOT EVACUATE WITH LUGGAGE.
- throw0101d 3y ago
  > DO NOT EVACUATE WITH LUGGAGE. Simple rule IMHO: keep your ID/password and a credit card on your person during take-off / landing. (Probably your phone, in a pocket, as well.) Practically speaking as long as you can ID yourself and buy things (pay-off later), there's no property that's worth your life (or the life of other passengers).
  - steveBK123 3y ago
    1000% If anything else is so imminently needed to maintain the life of you or your loved ones while traveling, keep it in your/their pockets. Past this everyone has some excuse of medical, dietary, sentimental, economic, etc reason to grab stuff out of their luggage. This contributes to loss of life. You have 60-90 seconds to evacuate a burning aircraft. This is 10-20x faster than a normal with-luggage deplaning. If you are fumbling around with luggage, you are a hazard to yourself and others. If you are evacuating a plane you are seconds to minutes away from a fleet of ambulances ready to whisk you away to a nearby trauma center. No existing medical condition is going to get you before the fire will.
  - ghaff 3y ago
    I don’t routinely do so but there are a few basic things that in an ideal world you should probably have on your person in some secure way—which admittedly probably requires some specific clothing. ADDED: There probably are certain specialized critical medicines that people should carry in a vial around their necks that they’re not getting anytime soon from an overwhelmed trauma center. But that’s probably true even absent the plane crash scenario.
    - steveBK123 3y ago
tgtweak 3y ago
Some video footage from inside the plane and of the impact. https://x.com/rawsalerts/status/1742127927880216725 https://x.com/rawsalerts/status/1742127927880216725
jmacd 3y ago
It is really impressive that everyone was able to evacuate the plane. From some of the videos online you can see that there was a significant and increasing amount of smoke in the cabin. It is a testament to the evolving design of commercial aircraft. The light strips on the floor always fascinate me when I am flying. I often think about how if the cabin was filling with smoke, those lights would be the only way you have to keep moving towards an exit.
jagrsw 3y ago
Could the accident be linked to the clarity of radio instructions? I saw a discussion suggesting the DH aircraft might have been unsure about the correct runway to use, C1 or C5. My aim isn't to critique the English proficiency of non-native speakers, especially those from non-Proto-Indo-European linguistic backgrounds. As a non-native English speaker myself, I understand the challenges. However, I found it trully hard to comprehend the airport's side of the communications due to heavily accented and unclear pronunciation. Shouldn't there be a greater emphasis on air traffic controllers improving their English skills, since English is lingua franca (pun intended) of aviation. Or perhaps this is irrelevant, considering aviation's global nature. Are pilots expected to adapt to and understand communications with strong accents?
- throw0101d 3y ago
  > Could the accident be linked to the clarity of radio instructions? I saw a discussion suggesting the DH aircraft might have been unsure about the correct runway to use, C1 or C5. From my comment in part of the discussion thread[0]: -- For the ATC, see: * https://archive.liveatc.net/rjtt/RJTT-Twr-TCA-Jan-02-2024-0830Z.mp3 https://archive.liveatc.net/rjtt/RJTT-Twr-TCA-Jan-02-2024-08... * Via: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868205-post57.html https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868205-post57.html 13:13 JL516 continue approach. 14:53 landing clearance. 15:01 readback. 15:13 Japan Coast Guard JA772A taxi instructions. 17:35 fire reported on 34R. * https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868237-post67.html https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868237-post67.html The recording quality isn't very good, perhaps because of the location of the receiver. -- The ATC quality of my local airport (CYYZ Tower) available through LiveATC is much better. I following some flying/pilot Youtubers, and their recordings of ATC are also quite good, so I'm not sure why LiveATC at HND is as statically as it is. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38839885#unv_38841161 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38839885#unv_38841161
  - Shank 3y ago
    All of these ATC feeds are from SDR stations close by that monitor the same frequencies. Your local airport sounds better because someone has a better SDR rig to receive it. Generally the audio is crystal clear in the cockpit and on the ground — it’s just that the SDR stations don’t have as good antennae as the real systems do.
kingofpandora 3y ago
I noticed in the video that many people onboard A359 were wearing masks. Would those have helped significantly to prevent smoke inhalation?
- bugbuddy 3y ago
  No, because regular masks would not work for such situations.
- porkbeer 3y ago
  Not at all.
- rightbyte 3y ago
  Maybe discrete pieces of ash.
aidenn0 3y ago
Kind of a morbid curiosity, but would a Dash-8 taxiing for takeoff have more or less fuel in total than an A350 coming in for landing?
jeffbee 3y ago
A much more informative video is https://youtu.be/6NbVdIoJsHY?t=169 https://youtu.be/6NbVdIoJsHY?t=169 ... you can see the accident aircraft enter the runway then stands there for 40+ seconds before the other aircraft lands on it. It seems like a lot of time during which controllers could have detected the conflict.
- cryptonector 3y ago
  Wow, the dash-8 begins to move into the runway at 2:48, and then sits there for the rest of the time. It's really hard to spot this from this video going forwards, but it you got backwards from the crash you can see the lights from the dash-8 and work out when it got onto the runway. Maybe the coast guard pilot thought he had permission to line up, but not to take off? Anyways, it's also pretty easy to see that it would have been difficult for the tower staff and the A350 pilots to notice the incursion and avoid the accident.
  - jeffbee 3y ago
    I think the wide angle of view from this camera gives a misleading impression of what it would have looked like in person. I also have no idea where the controllers would have been in this scene. Is the aircraft landing on 34R?
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  And 40 seconds where it should have been visible to the pilots of the airliner. I know they have checklists to run, but are neither of the pilots looking forward during final approach?
- JCharante 3y ago
  is this video from a plane spotter?
CrimsonCape 3y ago
Pilots increasingly seem to have an iPad with some kind of apps. Do you have experience with this? In terms of redundant systems, seems kinda obvious that if you look at a flight tracker on your ipad and see a plane on your runway, you don't land...
- lxgr 3y ago
  These apps usually use ADS-B as received by various community-operated receivers. This introduces a lag of several seconds, doesn't guarantee reception in tricky situations (such as planes flying very low, as during the final approach, or on the ground), and is limited to the planes' own position fix accuracy, which is orders of magnitude too coarse for this use case.
- icehawk 3y ago
  The coastguard aircraft involved only has a Mode S transponder and so those flight tracker websites can only determine the plane's position when there's enough receiver coverage to do multilateration
- rmccue 3y ago
  Aside from personal devices, which they definitely wouldn’t be using during takeoff and landing, tablets that pilots carry are Electronic Flight Bags (EFBs). These run specialised software, not something like Flightradar24. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_flight_bag https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_flight_bag
VoodooJuJu 3y ago
Such a high comment to score ratio is typically due to political polarization, but there's nothing politically polarizing about this, so what's the deal here?
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  I think it's because of how dang merged multiple threads together.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
maxcan 3y ago
Compare and contrast to Aeroflot 1492: Aeroflot: 41 passenger deaths, many bags saved. JAL: 0 passenger deaths, 0 bags saved. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_DT8dDIugQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_DT8dDIugQ
- p1mrx 3y ago
  How do you know that nobody evacuated with a bag?
amelius 3y ago
Sounds to me this could have been prevented with better software in the airplanes and control towers.
philip1209 3y ago
Would military planes be equipped with ACAS, and could ACAS avert this type of collision?
csharpminor 3y ago
I'd be curious to know from someone with more knowledge: are there any technological improvements that could prevent this kind of accident? It seems as though it should be possible (though perhaps not easy) to automatically detect an aircraft on runway and relay that to the approaching aircraft. With all respect for the coast guard pilots who died, I would say this incident is the "best case" scenario we could hope for when two large aircraft crash on a runway. Had the other plane been carrying passengers the casualties could have easily been in the hundreds. It seems odd to me that with all the safety advancements in aviation we don't have the technology to prevent this.
- matwood 3y ago
  Some airports do have ground lighting that changes when it's safe/unsafe to enter/cross runways. No idea if that existed here. I know JFK has it, as I watched it in action the last time I had a layover.
InTheArena 3y ago
The big take0away here is that the 90 second rule that Airbus fought and lost with the A380 and Boeing thought about fighting with the 787 and 777 is exactly right. Sometimes every second matters. A second take-away - emergencies are no excuse to ditch procedure and thinking about Safety. The SFO incident where a passenger was killed after exiting a vehicle by a vehicle rushing to the plane is another example.
- JCharante 3y ago
  did airbus try to fight against the 90 second rule? What changes did they make to eventually do a successful evacuation with an 800 person cabin configuration?
  - rootusrootus 3y ago
    That is an interesting question. An A380 has 16 exits and a maximum capacity of 853. A Boeing 737-900 has 8 exits and a maximum capacity of 188. The 90 second rule has to pass with 50% of the exits unavailable (nobody gets to know in advance which ones), and luggage & blankets strewn about the cabin. In the dark. I bet it's an interesting test to partake in.
  - InTheArena 3y ago
    Airbus tried to get the FAA to relax the requirement that every possible seat offered for sale be able to leave in 90 seconds - ie, just 600 instead of the fully rated 800. Then they asked to relax it to 120 seconds. Finally, they told the FAA that their models should be sufficient. The FAA (and eventually the European equivalent agencies) said no to these asks and made them do the full test with 800 people leaving the plane in 90 seconds. They did so in ~85 seconds, IIRC. Their last concern is that far more people get injured in tests than in reality, which was a fair point - but there were questions about the particular configuration that Airbus proposed. Also, Airbus never sold the A380 to any major US carrier, and no carrier was ever able to fill that many seats on the A380 sustainably. So maybe Airbus was right, but for the same reasons that eventually doomed the project.
    - 3y ago
wolverine876 3y ago
Why are ATC instructions given verbally over sometimes staticy channels using the always error-prone communication tech, human speech? Why not digital? The ATC operator chooses a command from a UI: 'JAL 123' > 'Runway 34R' > 'Clear for landing'. Everything cascades automatically from there: ATC's on-screen maps and info, airport lights, commands to all relevant planes (including 'Runway 34R' > 'Hold short'). Transmission to planes could be digital. Given the relatively few possible commands, we're talking very little bandwidth, plenty of room to ensure error correction, redundancy, etc. - and perfectly accurate reception. All planes would show the exact command on a screen, their maps etc would update, and they could play locally generated audio of the command. I know nothing about aviation. (I do know that entirely rebuilding matured, critical systems for the new technology is rarely a good idea - the trick is to start with one small subsystem, work out the bugs, mature it, and grow from there.)
- lxgr 3y ago
  For standard situations, text clearances might really be safer: Pilots usually just acknowledge, and augmentation systems could help warn them if they don't conform with a certain clearance. But having a broadcast channel accessible (for listening and talking) to all aircraft and ATC can increase situational awareness for everybody. Just look at the near-miss of Air Canada 759 [1] for an example of where it might have contributed to saving hundreds of lives: [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_759 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_759 While ATC controllers might be able to issue urgency text messages quickly enough on a keyboard, pilots literally have their hands full flying the airplane. Voice is their only feedback channel, and if it falls out of use, outages might go unnoticed for critical seconds.
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    > But having a broadcast channel accessible (for listening and talking) to all aircraft and ATC can increase situational awareness for everybody. OK, so send all messages to all aircraft (or to whatever the appropriate subset is). > pilots literally have their hands full flying the airplane. Voice is their only feedback channel Interesting. I wonder if the error rate of voice recognition exceeds the error rate of bad channels.
WalterBright 3y ago
This is why you always keep your shoes on when the airplane is on or near the ground. It can save your life.
- hamandcheese 3y ago
  Why do you need shoes to exit a plane?
  - JCharante 3y ago
    I find that I can run faster and have a better grip when I have shoes on. Also it protects me from stubbing my toes.
  - WalterBright 3y ago
    When you need to cross over flaming, jagged, sharp wreckage.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
bryanswift 3y ago
Not sure about Japanese/ICAO rules but line up and wait, especially after sunset has very specific criteria attached to it. 1) runway is used for departure only and 2) safety logic gear is working. These rules were put in place in the U.S. in 1991/92 after a sever accident in Los Angeles where a 737 landed on top of a Sweringer Metro liner.
leonson 3y ago
This is probably well-known to others but I am surprised to learn JAL uses big aircrafts to serve domestic flights, and I wonder how common this practice is. Is there somewhere I can query by input of "passenger flights of certain aircraft like A350 on a certain date", give me results of flights, ordered by distance in ascending order? Thought about Flightradar24 but they don't seem to offer API for personal usage
- bombcar 3y ago
  Iirc one of the biggest usages of A380s has been APAC island hopping.
  - sofixa 3y ago
    Almost exclusively ANA with their Japan - Hawaii flights on their 3 A380s. The other APAC A380 carriers like Singapore, Qantas, Thai use them for long haul routes, some of which may originate from islands (like Singapore).
pixl97 3y ago
Juan Brown has released his video on this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_sQ1L_xPmo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_sQ1L_xPmo
andy_ppp 3y ago
Does anyone know what stops the remaining fuel from igniting? Seems pretty amazing everyone got off, I’m looking forward to reading the full report of what happened!
SergeAx 3y ago
After 2019 incident of Sukhoy Superjet[1] I have my passport, the phone and the wallet on me 100% flight time. These three things I need to function, everything else can be left behind. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_1492 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_1492

216 points by nixass 3y ago

higeorge13 3y ago

Wow, 2 rough first 2024 days for Japan..

aaron695 3y ago
[dead]
manojlds 3y ago
In a way it's related to the first event.

trollied 3y ago

If this is going to be the main discussion thread, I'd recommend changing the link to a non-tabloid news article. All passengers and crew evacuated from the Airbus, thankfully.

brunohaid 3y ago

Definitely better links than Daily Mirror out there, avherald.com unfortunately overwhelmed, but in terms of discussion: - Crazy how well the carbon fiber A350 held up given that it seems to have landed pretty much directly on a Dash 8 (RIP Coast Guard team). Looks like trading long term flammability for initial rigidity lived up to the design intent. - Excellent evacuation job, especially as it looks like on some videos that the crew was unable to shut down the right engine, rendering the entire right side unusable (severed lines given the severe belly damage?) UPDATE: they actually did use the front right exit nevertheless https://x.com/tanakamaru1999/status/1742132422005981578 https://x.com/tanakamaru1999/status/1742132422005981578 - Don’t have headphones with me and in a public space, but landing / takeoff clearances should be somewhere in https://archive.liveatc.net/rjtt/RJTT-Twr-TCA-Jan-02-2024-0830Z.mp3 https://archive.liveatc.net/rjtt/RJTT-Twr-TCA-Jan-02-2024-08... if someone wants to try and find them (timestamps towards end of url come in 30 minute increments).

qwertox 3y ago
Direct link to the avherald.com page of the event in order to not hit the landing page: http://avherald.com/h?article=5132b9fe&opt=0 http://avherald.com/h?article=5132b9fe&opt=0
kzrdude 3y ago
It's somewhat reassuring to see an actual video of those chutes being used for evacuation, just never saw it before.
throw0101d 3y ago
> Excellent evacuation job While there many silly reasons to force people to shutdown electronics and such on planes, I think forcing people to not have any distractions during take-offs and landings is a good thing. Over 50% of incidents (fatal and hull loss/non-fatal) occurring during landing: * https://accidentstats.airbus.com/statistics/accident-by-flight-phase https://accidentstats.airbus.com/statistics/accident-by-flig... * https://www.1001crash.com/transport-page-statistique-lg-2-numpage-3.html https://www.1001crash.com/transport-page-statistique-lg-2-nu... With take-off and descent/approach being the next two more frequent phases.
- jefftk 3y ago
  Over 50%, sure, but 50% of a very small number. How many deaths do you expect keeping passengers from being distracted at these times would prevent? (I expect if you compare that to the number of people inconvenienced by the rule it's a terrible trade off.)
  - throw0101d 3y ago
    > How many deaths do you expect keeping passengers from being distracted at these times would prevent? As of today: 379.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]

yzydserd 3y ago

Not sure why the link is a UK Tabloid. Japan’s national broadcaster has a video of the moment of impact. Impact: https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20240102_302/ https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20240102_302/ All ~400 airbus passengers safe. Coastguard plane in earthquake relief efforts hit airbus (see video). 5 of 6 passengers unaccounted for.

pmontra 3y ago
A longer video (still in English) at https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20240102_304/ https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20240102_304/
aidog 3y ago
5 people dead aboard the coast guard plane that was responding to yesterdays earthquake. The airbus is still on fire https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20240102/k10014307191000.html https://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20240102/k10014307191000.ht...

epolanski 3y ago

I'll speculate: this looks like textbook runway invasion where miscommunication leads to two different aircrafts being allowed on a runway at the same time. Reminds me of LATAM 2213, which led to the very first Airbus 320 neo being written off [1]. Essentially, clearance to enter a runway has to be expressively given and confirmed in non-ubiquitous language ("Flight ABC requesting clearance to enter runway 01"). Yet LATAM incident shows how often emergency services are often unaccustomed to thorough communication (after all they do these procedures much more rarely) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LATAM_Airlines_Per%C3%BA_Flight_2213 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LATAM_Airlines_Per%C3%BA_Fligh...

konschubert 3y ago
it is crazy to me that all of this still relies on humans giving verbal clearance over radio. Shouldn’t there be a universal standard to communicate clearances to the computer systems of the airplanes and other runway vehicles? And shouldn’t there be a small, well-tested core system that makes sure clearance never conflicts? How on earth does all this still depend on skilled individuals not making a mistake? We got over this in other domains long ago.
- bamboozled 3y ago
  Maybe there is a good reason for it ? Wait for the answer before giving them judgment. You might be right, but there might be a valid answer.
- tonmoy 3y ago
  I doubt your “other domains” are as safe and reliable as the aviation industry. An automated system may be possible to make, but will require a huge undertaking to bring even close to the current safety standards, and would introduce its own safety issues
  - konschubert 3y ago
    If I step into the elevator door, it doesn’t squash me and the elevator won’t move.

The_suffocated 3y ago

Does this mean when the Airbus landed, there was a Coast Guard plane on the runway? Seems like the ground control had made a serious mistake.

rorroe53 3y ago
Could be a pilot mistake as well. Aircraft entering runway without clearence has happened before.
- epolanski 3y ago
  Not just aircraft, ground vehicles have caused deaths by entering runways too.
yzydserd 3y ago
Coastguard plane landing hit airbus on tarmac. Edit: seems I was wrong. The airbus was landing.
- trollied 3y ago
  > Coastguard plane landing hit airbus on tarmac. Unfortunately, you have invented this narrative. There is video of the Airbus landing and striking the other plane. AV Herald link: https://avherald.com/h?article=5132b9fe&opt=0 https://avherald.com/h?article=5132b9fe&opt=0
aaronmdjones 3y ago
Ground control wouldn't have cleared them to hold short, or to position and hold (US: "line up and wait"). That would have been the tower, not ground. Ground is only responsible for taxiways, not runways. The Coastguard plane was cleared to hold short at C2, but entered the runway instead from C2 as if cleared to position and hold (Edit: Or maybe they thought they were cleared to take off, but that's far less likely).
- wlonkly 3y ago

borissk 3y ago

[flagged]

resolutebat 3y ago
Nope, that narrative was largely a myth. The people at the back by and large died instantly in the crash, without even time to undo their seatbelts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_1492#Evacuation_with_luggage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_1492#Evacuatio...
- borissk 3y ago
  Hmmmm, there were plenty of videos of people with hand luggage outside the plane - surely taking this luggage was against the rules and has slowed down the evacuation. I won't be surprised if TASS is just trying to cover the story. I think it was a different Russian crash were the pilots were given state medals for saving the passengers. A later investigation found these same pilots were responsible for the crash. The powers that be decided that instead of admitting they were wrong, revoking the medals and sending the pilots to prison they'll just cover up the whole story.
  - okasaki 3y ago
    I don't see how that makes sense. Why would they say the people died instantly in a Russian aircraft if the truth was that they died because others wanted to retrieve luggage? Not everything the Russian government does is a conspiracy.
    - throwaway290 3y ago
      As a Russian I can easily envision the pathologically lying government doing this. The Wikipedia article linked above shows that there are no verified sources except government and that government also says there's no war in Ukraine. The credibility of the source is very low in my eyes. And generally remember the general effort to discredit West. If you want West to look more immoral than you, it's hard to do without looking more moral than West and this incident, if true, would be an example of people being VERY immoral. As you slowly collect your bags you have no way to know that people behind you are 100% dead and beyond help. Any attempt of the government to say it's fine is just pathetic.

davidkuennen 3y ago

It's so impressive that all of them got out alive. It's also the first hull loss of an A350. Seems to be an amazingly safe plane considering this.

Nextgrid 3y ago

I wonder if some kind of "TCAS" for runways can be implemented - once the controller clears an aircraft for a given runway, some antennas start broadcasting that aircraft's identifier so any equipped planes approaching the runway can tell whether they've been cleared for it. For planes on approach, the existing ILS antennas can be reused but I'm not sure whether that will work on the ground - do the ILS antennas cover enough of the ground to accurately target a plane that's approaching the runway perpendicularly (off a taxiway, etc)?

t0mas88 3y ago
Two types of systems already exists on the ATC side of things. There are red stop-bar lights at each runway entry point. Pilots are trained never to cross a red stop-bar even if told by ATC. The controller has to press a button to turn the lights off, and they automatically come back on after 1 plane has passed the lights. In larger airports with an automated system, the system monitors the runway occupancy and approach sector. If the runway is occupied or an aircraft is on final within a certain distance, the system throws an alert before the stop-bars can be turned off. On top of that there is also an autonomous version of this system that will use red lights to indicate a dangerous runway status (e.g. aircraft on approach) at each entry point. And the other way around, an aircraft line up for takeoff (but holding) will get red lights if any of the entry points further down the runway are crossed. More here: https://skybrary.aero/articles/autonomous-runway-incursion-warning-system-ariws https://skybrary.aero/articles/autonomous-runway-incursion-w...
- t0mas88 3y ago
  I can't edit this comment anymore, but there has just been an update that the stop bar lights I describe above were out of service at the airport in this incident.
__m 3y ago
ASDE-X should warn the controller, not sure if it's installed at that airport
- 3y ago

monkey_monkey 3y ago

The Guardian is reporting that 5 people who were on the coastguard plane have died.

KptMarchewa 3y ago

The fact that everyone made it out alive from A350 is a great testament to the design. Insane.

rootusrootus 3y ago
Eh, not really. Any passenger plane design is supposed to be able to evacuate in 90 seconds. They had several minutes (at least) to get off that plane before the fire spread to the cabin.
- lxgr 3y ago
  Looking at the videos, the plane was literally doused in burning jet fuel as it was decelerating at high speed. I still find that very impressive for a plane built out of ultimately flammable materials (carbon fiber).
  - rootusrootus 3y ago
    I would expect similar performance from any plane, whether aluminum or composite.
- KptMarchewa 3y ago
  Fire is one thing, explosion as the result of collision is other.
- numpad0 3y ago
  It's one thing to demand something and another to fulfill it.
- sofixa 3y ago
  And passenger planes are supposed to not crash themselves in the ground, but the only other major passenger plane manufacturer couldn't even get that right. So planes working as expected and saving lives is a thing to be noted.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

Aeolun 3y ago

Holy crap. That’s some news to come home to after the earthquake yesterday…

king_magic 3y ago

This never should have happened, and mark my words we’re going to see the same type of accident in the US if we don’t radically rework ATC.

Dalewyn 3y ago
It's still unknown if the cause was ATC mishandling the situation, we'll have to see how what the investigation finds.
epolanski 3y ago
You're implying this is ATC rather than human-error related.
- TangoFox 3y ago
  To anyone else jumping to conclusions: First, please do not jump to conclusions. Secondly, this incident was in Japan, not the US. Feelings about US ATC should not be a factor in this situation. Third, wasn't there a recent runway collision (wing clipped a tail) in the US where the pilot was quick to blame ATC on the radio, but it turns out that pilot entered the runway without permission? (initial conclusions are often wrong) Disclaimer: I am a US ATC - The views expressed here are my own and not necessarily those of FAA.
  - king_magic 3y ago
    Just to be clear I’m not calling out ATC specifically, as in the people who are controllers. Rather, the entire system of air traffic control. It seems to me if we end up in a situation where a pilot does something wrong in a sensitive area that can lead to a catastrophic outcome, we didn’t do a good job of controlling air traffic. Full stop. The system is amazingly safe but clearly there are pockets of very poor control/decision making around runway incursions or near misses around the runway.
mym1990 3y ago
I feel like 'radically' reworking anything is a great first step in increasing errors while the new processes get ingrained. There needs to a measured and meticulous approach to reworking ATC if it is to happen.

m_eiman 3y ago

Here's a first-hand account from one of the passengers on the Airbus, somewhat decently translated from Swedish: https://www-svt-se.translate.goog/nyheter/utrikes/svensk-familj-flydde-eldinfernot-i-japanska-flygplanet-en-skrackhistoria?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=sv&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://www-svt-se.translate.goog/nyheter/utrikes/svensk-fam...

nottorp 3y ago

We really need a paywall mark. Too bad linking to av....ld would probably shut down the site for today.

yardstick 3y ago
Anyone here from one of the large CDN providers want to reach out to AV Herald and offer him some free services? It’s such a useful and informative resource. Too bad it’s super slow when accessed in AU/NZ and I guess outside US/EU.
- roelschroeven 3y ago
  Earlier today it was very slow, and often timing out, from the EU too. I haven't tried again since.
  - nottorp 3y ago
    Guessing because this accident made it to mainstream news.
    - roelschroeven 3y ago
      That's what I thought too, yes. It's much more responsive now.

supernova87a 3y ago

I dare say / guess that 2 combined factors will have helped the successful evacuation effort (especially given that these aircraft for Japan internal flights are some of the densest passenger configurations): 1. Domestic flight, with people less likely to be hauling around lots of belongings, although in Japan people already bring much less onto flights with them. 2. The well-known social expectation/procedure-abiding inclination of everyday Japanese people kicking in to enforce an orderly (and no bag-carrying) exit. Others may have observed similarly when flying in Japan. They can regularly board a widebody plane in 15 minutes, whereas 30-40+ minutes for the US still produces departure delays. I am guessing this efficiency factors into the evacuation as well. Versus other evacuation videos I have seen where people are actually exiting with their rollaboards. Really shocking.

stevehawk 3y ago
I have to admit, I wonder how many lives would have been lost if this happened in America. "I have to get my laptop!" "where's my carry-on!?" "I think I left my phone!"

steveBK123 3y ago

This is why you follow cabin crew instructions and DO NOT CARRY YOUR LUGGAGE out of the aircraft in an emergency. Your luggage is not worth more than a fellow passengers life. Contrast this with evacuation footage of western passenger planes..

rgrieselhuber 3y ago
Indeed. It’s a good idea to keep your passport and some small USB drives (password database, Linux image for installation on a new laptop, etc.) on your person instead of in your luggage when you fly.
- hn_throwaway_69 3y ago
  >password database, Linux image for installation on a new laptop Heh. Imagine surviving a plane crash. Everyone is busy calling their loved ones, and I'm busy setting up my new Linux distribution on a laptop bought in duty free, using the Linux image in my pocket.
  - chilmers 3y ago
    After six hours trying to get the touchpad working you're wishing you'd died in the crash.
aaron695 3y ago
[dead]
nytesky 3y ago
Members of my family require medication (epipen, some various pills), and I keep that along with a flashlight (in case I need to administer in pitch black) in a small haversack. I would probably try to take that with me, as I would hate to survive the crash but then have a fatal medical event in the aftermath and not have the tools. I do feel conflicted since the no luggage mantra has been drilled in for decades.
- 3y ago

ablation 3y ago

Doesn't sound like quite such a miracle right now for the unfortunate crew of the Coast Guard aircraft, with five of the six crew unaccounted for, sadly.

argiopetech 3y ago
Now confirmed deceased, unfortunately.

throw0101d 3y ago

For the ATC, see: * https://archive.liveatc.net/rjtt/RJTT-Twr-TCA-Jan-02-2024-0830Z.mp3 https://archive.liveatc.net/rjtt/RJTT-Twr-TCA-Jan-02-2024-08... * Via: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868205-post57.html https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868205-post57.html 13:13 JL516 continue approach. 14:53 landing clearance. 15:01 readback. 15:13 Japan Coast Guard JA772A taxi instructions. 17:35 fire reported on 34R. * https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868237-post67.html https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868237-post67.html The recording quality isn't very good, perhaps because of the location of the receiver.

mkii 3y ago
Whenever I listen to these types of recordings, there's so much static and it's hard to hear the words. Is this how it actually sounds to pilots/ATC operators or is their feed actually much clearer?
- lxgr 3y ago
  It's usually much clearer. These unofficial ATC feeds are usually captured by volunteers or at least companies not directly affiliated with the aviation industry (similarly to services like Flightradar24), sometimes some distance away from airports, which makes ATC and aircraft on the ground really hard to hear. What also helps a lot is that the formats of messages relayed are pretty standardized (ICAO phraseology), and knowing what phrases to listen for can help a lot. On the other hand, it can unfortunately also cause people to hear what they are primed for – such as a landing or takeoff clearance... (Not implying that this happened here – I can't make out what's being said on the tape myself!)
- gosub100 3y ago
  I can't prove it, but I doubt most of the ATC recording amateurs have very good antennas. Also, the ATC transmitters are likely pointed upward for obvious reasons.
culebron21 3y ago
I really wonder how visible the Dash-8 was on the runway? After all, it has strobes, beacon, and the A350 has landing lights. Or there's too much other flashing lights around the runway? Or the pilots were busy monitoring the displays?

somewhereoutth 3y ago

I'd suggest that the miracle escape is testament to ~100? years of evolution of civil aviation safety practices.

adastra22 3y ago
5 people died. I wouldn't call it a miracle.
- ApolloFortyNine 3y ago
  >All 379 passengers and crew of a Japan Airlines plane escaped a devastating fire that erupted after it collided with a smaller Coast Guard aircraft at Tokyo’s Haneda airport on Tuesday. That's 379 lives saved, is the number not important, or is it the ratio?
  - reactordev 3y ago
    It should have been 384. If 10,000 people die but 1,000,000 are "saved", do we not mourn the 10,000 people? Have a heart my man. What if you were one of those 10,000?
    - RHSeeger 3y ago
      If a "normal" outcome for such an event would have been much closer to 1,000,000 being killed, then yes it would be wonderful if 990,000 were saved. Sure, we mourn the dead, but we can still be happy for the saved.
      - adastra22 3y ago
        Still, the word miracle would be inappropriate.
      - reactordev 3y ago
        wonderful for sure, but not a miracle. A miracle would be "all 1,000,000 people survived". Media likes to throw words with weight behind things without. It's not a miracle, it's extremely fortunate. However, any loss of life due to preventable disaster is/should be - unacceptable. The coast guard aircraft crewmen that were struck shouldn't have been near the runway at all. They should have waived off to go-around or been better at ground operations to make sure the runways were clear.

mrabcx 3y ago

According to Flightradar24, https://twitter.com/flightradar24/status/1742136715253313938 https://twitter.com/flightradar24/status/1742136715253313938, the Japanese coast guard aircraft was not equipped with a ADS-B transponder. Probably because it's not a requirement for military aircraft. That can explain why the ATC and/or JAL was not aware of the exact location of the plane.

Dalewyn 3y ago
Minor nitpick, but the Japan Coast Guard is not a military (and so the concerned aircraft isn't military). It serves under the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism; unlike the JSDF which serves under the Ministry of Defense.
- alistairSH 3y ago
  Curious, what's the rule for USCG and transponders? USCG is part of DHS and considered a military branch (despite not being in DoD alongside the other military branches and having a primarily law-enforcement mission).
  - manquer 3y ago
    Civilian transponders would give away the position of the craft to smugglers and others trying to evade the coast guard. I would expect they would have the ability to switch off their transponders at minimum for missions.
throw0101d 3y ago
It has a transponder, and previous flights for it were recorded: * https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/ja722a https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/ja722a * Via: https://twitter.com/flightradar24/status/1742136715253313938 https://twitter.com/flightradar24/status/1742136715253313938 * https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/de-havilland-canada-dhc-8-300-ja722a-japan-coast-guard/34j0y1 https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/de-havilland-canada-d...

icegreentea2 3y ago

Other sources (https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/japan-airliner-fire-1.7072315 https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/japan-airliner-fire-1.7072315) say that the coast guard aircraft was a dash-8.

wkat4242 3y ago
5 crew is a lot for a cargo flight actually. I wonder why there were so many on board.
- icegreentea2 3y ago
  I think it sometimes makes sense to carry extra people to help with offloading, depending on the situation. The Dash-8 is not a cargo aircraft - it's not like you can just roll pallets on and off. It's also possible that it would do a cargo run, and then do some surveillance operations (the JSDF employ the Dash-8 in the maritime surveillance role) to help with damage assessment.

andyjohnson0 3y ago

There's a PPRUNE thread with the usual mix of comments at https://www.pprune.org/accidents-close-calls/656665-jal-incident-haneda-airport-4.html https://www.pprune.org/accidents-close-calls/656665-jal-inci... Comments get more informative (and informed?) down the thread.

asylteltine 3y ago
Wow that live video really puts the size in perspective. The firefighters are minuscule compared to the plane
JCharante 3y ago
Hmm. That is interesting. It seemed like the hose was really heavy and he was all alone. I wonder why.

nixass 3y ago

First A350 hull loss

cgeier 3y ago
But unlikely to be the plane's fault.
- nixass 3y ago
  Definitely not. It's actually great how the frame endured whole thing enough for people to safely evacuate.

wkat4242 3y ago

Admiral Cloudberg has their work cut out for them again... I always love their insights (not sure if it's a man or a woman) It's not really a miracle though. Just the system working as intended, and the many lessons learned from the lives that were lost in the past paying off. As an example: due to this accident with many fatalities, the process for fire on the runway has been improved considerably. In that case the wind direction made a big difference in the number of fatalities, because it blew toxic smoke and fire into the fuselage while the evacuation was ongoing. Lessons were learned and procedures fixed. But it's still important to remember that those lessons were paid in blood. https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/fire-on-the-runway-the-manchester-airport-disaster-and-the-tragedy-of-british-airtours-flight-28m-0a2054e27fff https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/fire-on-the-runway-the-m...

Varimpls 3y ago
A woman, not that it matters
EdwardDiego 3y ago
It'll be a long while before the Admiral does, she prefers to work on reports from the investigations.

drooopy 3y ago

Jeez, Japan did not start the year off on the right foot.

steveBK123 3y ago

Yet another Japanese plane evacuation without people lugging backpacks & wheelies. Commendable work by the cabin crew and passengers. Contrast that with some of the Spirit/Southwest/Qantas evacuation videos we have seen. DO NOT EVACUATE WITH LUGGAGE.

throw0101d 3y ago
> DO NOT EVACUATE WITH LUGGAGE. Simple rule IMHO: keep your ID/password and a credit card on your person during take-off / landing. (Probably your phone, in a pocket, as well.) Practically speaking as long as you can ID yourself and buy things (pay-off later), there's no property that's worth your life (or the life of other passengers).
- steveBK123 3y ago
  1000% If anything else is so imminently needed to maintain the life of you or your loved ones while traveling, keep it in your/their pockets. Past this everyone has some excuse of medical, dietary, sentimental, economic, etc reason to grab stuff out of their luggage. This contributes to loss of life. You have 60-90 seconds to evacuate a burning aircraft. This is 10-20x faster than a normal with-luggage deplaning. If you are fumbling around with luggage, you are a hazard to yourself and others. If you are evacuating a plane you are seconds to minutes away from a fleet of ambulances ready to whisk you away to a nearby trauma center. No existing medical condition is going to get you before the fire will.
- ghaff 3y ago
  I don’t routinely do so but there are a few basic things that in an ideal world you should probably have on your person in some secure way—which admittedly probably requires some specific clothing. ADDED: There probably are certain specialized critical medicines that people should carry in a vial around their necks that they’re not getting anytime soon from an overwhelmed trauma center. But that’s probably true even absent the plane crash scenario.
  - steveBK123 3y ago

tgtweak 3y ago

Some video footage from inside the plane and of the impact. https://x.com/rawsalerts/status/1742127927880216725 https://x.com/rawsalerts/status/1742127927880216725

jmacd 3y ago

It is really impressive that everyone was able to evacuate the plane. From some of the videos online you can see that there was a significant and increasing amount of smoke in the cabin. It is a testament to the evolving design of commercial aircraft. The light strips on the floor always fascinate me when I am flying. I often think about how if the cabin was filling with smoke, those lights would be the only way you have to keep moving towards an exit.

jagrsw 3y ago

Could the accident be linked to the clarity of radio instructions? I saw a discussion suggesting the DH aircraft might have been unsure about the correct runway to use, C1 or C5. My aim isn't to critique the English proficiency of non-native speakers, especially those from non-Proto-Indo-European linguistic backgrounds. As a non-native English speaker myself, I understand the challenges. However, I found it trully hard to comprehend the airport's side of the communications due to heavily accented and unclear pronunciation. Shouldn't there be a greater emphasis on air traffic controllers improving their English skills, since English is lingua franca (pun intended) of aviation. Or perhaps this is irrelevant, considering aviation's global nature. Are pilots expected to adapt to and understand communications with strong accents?

throw0101d 3y ago
> Could the accident be linked to the clarity of radio instructions? I saw a discussion suggesting the DH aircraft might have been unsure about the correct runway to use, C1 or C5. From my comment in part of the discussion thread[0]: -- For the ATC, see: * https://archive.liveatc.net/rjtt/RJTT-Twr-TCA-Jan-02-2024-0830Z.mp3 https://archive.liveatc.net/rjtt/RJTT-Twr-TCA-Jan-02-2024-08... * Via: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868205-post57.html https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868205-post57.html 13:13 JL516 continue approach. 14:53 landing clearance. 15:01 readback. 15:13 Japan Coast Guard JA772A taxi instructions. 17:35 fire reported on 34R. * https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868237-post67.html https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35868237-post67.html The recording quality isn't very good, perhaps because of the location of the receiver. -- The ATC quality of my local airport (CYYZ Tower) available through LiveATC is much better. I following some flying/pilot Youtubers, and their recordings of ATC are also quite good, so I'm not sure why LiveATC at HND is as statically as it is. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38839885#unv_38841161 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38839885#unv_38841161
- Shank 3y ago
  All of these ATC feeds are from SDR stations close by that monitor the same frequencies. Your local airport sounds better because someone has a better SDR rig to receive it. Generally the audio is crystal clear in the cockpit and on the ground — it’s just that the SDR stations don’t have as good antennae as the real systems do.

kingofpandora 3y ago

I noticed in the video that many people onboard A359 were wearing masks. Would those have helped significantly to prevent smoke inhalation?

bugbuddy 3y ago
No, because regular masks would not work for such situations.
porkbeer 3y ago
Not at all.
rightbyte 3y ago
Maybe discrete pieces of ash.

aidenn0 3y ago

Kind of a morbid curiosity, but would a Dash-8 taxiing for takeoff have more or less fuel in total than an A350 coming in for landing?

jeffbee 3y ago

A much more informative video is https://youtu.be/6NbVdIoJsHY?t=169 https://youtu.be/6NbVdIoJsHY?t=169 ... you can see the accident aircraft enter the runway then stands there for 40+ seconds before the other aircraft lands on it. It seems like a lot of time during which controllers could have detected the conflict.

cryptonector 3y ago
Wow, the dash-8 begins to move into the runway at 2:48, and then sits there for the rest of the time. It's really hard to spot this from this video going forwards, but it you got backwards from the crash you can see the lights from the dash-8 and work out when it got onto the runway. Maybe the coast guard pilot thought he had permission to line up, but not to take off? Anyways, it's also pretty easy to see that it would have been difficult for the tower staff and the A350 pilots to notice the incursion and avoid the accident.
- jeffbee 3y ago
  I think the wide angle of view from this camera gives a misleading impression of what it would have looked like in person. I also have no idea where the controllers would have been in this scene. Is the aircraft landing on 34R?
rootusrootus 3y ago
And 40 seconds where it should have been visible to the pilots of the airliner. I know they have checklists to run, but are neither of the pilots looking forward during final approach?
JCharante 3y ago
is this video from a plane spotter?

CrimsonCape 3y ago

Pilots increasingly seem to have an iPad with some kind of apps. Do you have experience with this? In terms of redundant systems, seems kinda obvious that if you look at a flight tracker on your ipad and see a plane on your runway, you don't land...

lxgr 3y ago
These apps usually use ADS-B as received by various community-operated receivers. This introduces a lag of several seconds, doesn't guarantee reception in tricky situations (such as planes flying very low, as during the final approach, or on the ground), and is limited to the planes' own position fix accuracy, which is orders of magnitude too coarse for this use case.
icehawk 3y ago
The coastguard aircraft involved only has a Mode S transponder and so those flight tracker websites can only determine the plane's position when there's enough receiver coverage to do multilateration
rmccue 3y ago
Aside from personal devices, which they definitely wouldn’t be using during takeoff and landing, tablets that pilots carry are Electronic Flight Bags (EFBs). These run specialised software, not something like Flightradar24. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_flight_bag https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_flight_bag

VoodooJuJu 3y ago

Such a high comment to score ratio is typically due to political polarization, but there's nothing politically polarizing about this, so what's the deal here?

anigbrowl 3y ago
I think it's because of how dang merged multiple threads together.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

maxcan 3y ago

Compare and contrast to Aeroflot 1492: Aeroflot: 41 passenger deaths, many bags saved. JAL: 0 passenger deaths, 0 bags saved. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_DT8dDIugQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_DT8dDIugQ

p1mrx 3y ago
How do you know that nobody evacuated with a bag?

amelius 3y ago

Sounds to me this could have been prevented with better software in the airplanes and control towers.

philip1209 3y ago

Would military planes be equipped with ACAS, and could ACAS avert this type of collision?

csharpminor 3y ago

I'd be curious to know from someone with more knowledge: are there any technological improvements that could prevent this kind of accident? It seems as though it should be possible (though perhaps not easy) to automatically detect an aircraft on runway and relay that to the approaching aircraft. With all respect for the coast guard pilots who died, I would say this incident is the "best case" scenario we could hope for when two large aircraft crash on a runway. Had the other plane been carrying passengers the casualties could have easily been in the hundreds. It seems odd to me that with all the safety advancements in aviation we don't have the technology to prevent this.

matwood 3y ago
Some airports do have ground lighting that changes when it's safe/unsafe to enter/cross runways. No idea if that existed here. I know JFK has it, as I watched it in action the last time I had a layover.

InTheArena 3y ago

The big take0away here is that the 90 second rule that Airbus fought and lost with the A380 and Boeing thought about fighting with the 787 and 777 is exactly right. Sometimes every second matters. A second take-away - emergencies are no excuse to ditch procedure and thinking about Safety. The SFO incident where a passenger was killed after exiting a vehicle by a vehicle rushing to the plane is another example.

JCharante 3y ago
did airbus try to fight against the 90 second rule? What changes did they make to eventually do a successful evacuation with an 800 person cabin configuration?
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  That is an interesting question. An A380 has 16 exits and a maximum capacity of 853. A Boeing 737-900 has 8 exits and a maximum capacity of 188. The 90 second rule has to pass with 50% of the exits unavailable (nobody gets to know in advance which ones), and luggage & blankets strewn about the cabin. In the dark. I bet it's an interesting test to partake in.
- InTheArena 3y ago
  Airbus tried to get the FAA to relax the requirement that every possible seat offered for sale be able to leave in 90 seconds - ie, just 600 instead of the fully rated 800. Then they asked to relax it to 120 seconds. Finally, they told the FAA that their models should be sufficient. The FAA (and eventually the European equivalent agencies) said no to these asks and made them do the full test with 800 people leaving the plane in 90 seconds. They did so in ~85 seconds, IIRC. Their last concern is that far more people get injured in tests than in reality, which was a fair point - but there were questions about the particular configuration that Airbus proposed. Also, Airbus never sold the A380 to any major US carrier, and no carrier was ever able to fill that many seats on the A380 sustainably. So maybe Airbus was right, but for the same reasons that eventually doomed the project.
  - 3y ago

wolverine876 3y ago

Why are ATC instructions given verbally over sometimes staticy channels using the always error-prone communication tech, human speech? Why not digital? The ATC operator chooses a command from a UI: 'JAL 123' > 'Runway 34R' > 'Clear for landing'. Everything cascades automatically from there: ATC's on-screen maps and info, airport lights, commands to all relevant planes (including 'Runway 34R' > 'Hold short'). Transmission to planes could be digital. Given the relatively few possible commands, we're talking very little bandwidth, plenty of room to ensure error correction, redundancy, etc. - and perfectly accurate reception. All planes would show the exact command on a screen, their maps etc would update, and they could play locally generated audio of the command. I know nothing about aviation. (I do know that entirely rebuilding matured, critical systems for the new technology is rarely a good idea - the trick is to start with one small subsystem, work out the bugs, mature it, and grow from there.)

lxgr 3y ago
For standard situations, text clearances might really be safer: Pilots usually just acknowledge, and augmentation systems could help warn them if they don't conform with a certain clearance. But having a broadcast channel accessible (for listening and talking) to all aircraft and ATC can increase situational awareness for everybody. Just look at the near-miss of Air Canada 759 [1] for an example of where it might have contributed to saving hundreds of lives: [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_759 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_759 While ATC controllers might be able to issue urgency text messages quickly enough on a keyboard, pilots literally have their hands full flying the airplane. Voice is their only feedback channel, and if it falls out of use, outages might go unnoticed for critical seconds.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  > But having a broadcast channel accessible (for listening and talking) to all aircraft and ATC can increase situational awareness for everybody. OK, so send all messages to all aircraft (or to whatever the appropriate subset is). > pilots literally have their hands full flying the airplane. Voice is their only feedback channel Interesting. I wonder if the error rate of voice recognition exceeds the error rate of bad channels.

WalterBright 3y ago

This is why you always keep your shoes on when the airplane is on or near the ground. It can save your life.

hamandcheese 3y ago
Why do you need shoes to exit a plane?
- JCharante 3y ago
  I find that I can run faster and have a better grip when I have shoes on. Also it protects me from stubbing my toes.
- WalterBright 3y ago
  When you need to cross over flaming, jagged, sharp wreckage.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

bryanswift 3y ago

Not sure about Japanese/ICAO rules but line up and wait, especially after sunset has very specific criteria attached to it. 1) runway is used for departure only and 2) safety logic gear is working. These rules were put in place in the U.S. in 1991/92 after a sever accident in Los Angeles where a 737 landed on top of a Sweringer Metro liner.

leonson 3y ago

This is probably well-known to others but I am surprised to learn JAL uses big aircrafts to serve domestic flights, and I wonder how common this practice is. Is there somewhere I can query by input of "passenger flights of certain aircraft like A350 on a certain date", give me results of flights, ordered by distance in ascending order? Thought about Flightradar24 but they don't seem to offer API for personal usage

bombcar 3y ago
Iirc one of the biggest usages of A380s has been APAC island hopping.
- sofixa 3y ago
  Almost exclusively ANA with their Japan - Hawaii flights on their 3 A380s. The other APAC A380 carriers like Singapore, Qantas, Thai use them for long haul routes, some of which may originate from islands (like Singapore).

pixl97 3y ago

Juan Brown has released his video on this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_sQ1L_xPmo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_sQ1L_xPmo

andy_ppp 3y ago

Does anyone know what stops the remaining fuel from igniting? Seems pretty amazing everyone got off, I’m looking forward to reading the full report of what happened!

SergeAx 3y ago

After 2019 incident of Sukhoy Superjet[1] I have my passport, the phone and the wallet on me 100% flight time. These three things I need to function, everything else can be left behind. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_1492 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeroflot_Flight_1492