Watch vid...

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/04/11/new.yo ... tml?hpt=T2

Could have been a lot worse.

Not to sound cruel, but part of me almost hopes one of those people that think that they don't have to pay attention to the seatbelt sign and can be up whenever they want, was out of their seat. Maybe this should be part of the briefing video...at least it would liven them up a bit (granted, the RJ doesn't have video demos, but in general).

Grassstrippilot wrote:Not to sound cruel, but part of me almost hopes one of those people that think that they don't have to pay attention to the seatbelt sign and can be up whenever they want, was out of their seat. Maybe this should be part of the briefing video...at least it would liven them up a bit (granted, the RJ doesn't have video demos, but in general).

That's not cruel at all,and that is one of my pet peeves.People just think that the rules don't apply to them Not too long ago I was on a Bulgaria Air flight to Sofia and as soon as we hit the ground about 10 people jumped up to start getting their bags from the overhead compartment.They totally ignored the crew asking them to stay seated as if the rules didn't apply to them.As fate would have it the pilot had to stand on the brakes to "avoid something" and the result was a pile of idiots on the floor with the rest of the cabin clapping and laughing


I wonder what the damages are to the A380.

Can you imagine the ride in the cockpit of the Bombardier? The way the front end spun I'm surprised there weren't any injuries.

Says something about the construction of that CRJ 700..I would've though it would have ripped the tail right off the way it spun it around!

Grassstrippilot wrote:Not to sound cruel, but part of me almost hopes one of those people that think that they don't have to pay attention to the seatbelt sign and can be up whenever they want, was out of their seat. Maybe this should be part of the briefing video...at least it would liven them up a bit (granted, the RJ doesn't have video demos, but in general).

O.K.

I am not proud .....but what the heck? Consider that confession is good for the soul. During my years with the airline it always pissed me off that passengers would get up while we were taxiing and ignore the flight attendants and seat belt sign.

When I was a rather new DC-9 captain I was taxiing into the gate at Atlanta. A flight attendant called me on the interphone to advise me that a passenger was up walking around despite her pleadings and warnings. The opportunity had arrived. Moving along at about 10 mph I abruptly applied the brakes and came to an immediate halt.....throwing the passenger to the floor.

I then picked up the PA and appologised for the sudden stop....claiming that a stray dog had run across the taxiway right in front of us. I heard the flight attendants helping the passenger back into his seat. I was feeling full of myself....thinking how I had "shown" that asshole and demonstrated to all the passengers the necessity of remaining seated.

While deplaning passengers at the gate, as was my custom, I stood outside the cockpit and thanked our passengers for chosing our airline. About halfway though the deplaning.... a small, feeble, eldery, black, gentleman, dressed in a nice suit and leaning on a his care.....approached me with downcast eyes. "Captain" he says...."Sir I am so sorry for getting up when we were taxiing into the gate." " I am ashamed for having caused your crew trouble....but I just had surgery and was about to pee in my pants." " I just couldn't wait any longer." " I am sorry captain." It was then that I noted the dark wet spot down the leg of his trousers.

I felt like the biggest asshole that had ever lived!! Come to think of it...at that moment I was the biggest asshole that had ever lived!!

Bob

p.s. Yeah I know. There could have been a lawsuit. Probably would have beat it though as both I and the first officer would have sworn that we nearly hit a huge German Shepard. But that is not the point of my.....confession.

I don't see it being a good idea to fly that poor plane again until the entire structure has been checked. That sort of movement is pretty extreme, and yeah... if anyone was at all sleepy, they weren't afterwards.

Glidergeek wrote:Can you imagine the ride in the cockpit of the Bombardier? The way the front end spun I'm surprised there weren't any injuries.

The cockpit was the calmest part of the plane. They mostly just rotated 90 degrees. The poor folks in the back rows, however, rotated the same 90 degrees but also got knocked some 80 feet in a very short time. If I had to put my kids on that CRJ and do it over I'd put them in the cockpit.

There are certainly those that are legit (people sick, restroom needs, etc.), but unfortunately they are the vast minority...from my observations anyway. Usually people getting their cell phone out of their bag or getting their bag down so they can position themselves (in their minds) to save 10 seconds getting off the plane. Then have their lawyers and media on speed dial when they get hurt.

I saw the RJ on the way in yesterday but couldn't get a good look at it. I'm sure there will be quite the inspection on both aircraft.

With that fancy glass cockpit and $100million++ airplane, why don't they have forward looking wingtip cameras for the pilots to observe?? Sort of 'on-board' wing walkers....... The wing go WAY out there and that would be a lotta help-IF the pilot was being careful.......
In this case there didn't appear to be any 'caution/careful' involved-with the speed he was taxiing......

My 2 cents
lc

I hope they at least got an excusez moi. Looks like the CRJ was waiting for the ground crew to move their baggage equipt. so they could park.

I can see the NSTB accident report now: : the pilot failed to remember he was taxiing the frigging biggest airplane in the world."

I've seen this happen before, but it was only to a couple of ultralights. Maybe the ground controllers were asleep? It sure would be interesting to hear the Airbus pilot's initial comment upon impact!

courierguy wrote:I can see the NSTB accident report now: : the pilot failed to remember he was taxiing the frigging biggest airplane in the world."

I've seen this happen before, but it was only to a couple of ultralights. Maybe the ground controllers were asleep? It sure would be interesting to hear the Airbus pilot's initial comment upon impact!

Probably however you say "Aw Fudge!" in French.

It sure would be interesting to hear the Airbus pilot's initial comment upon impact!

Captain to first officer: "So what are you going to do on your two weeks off?"

So, when I teach tailwheel flying I am always nagging my students to slow down while taxying...sometimes I even use bad language. "Why are you in such a hurry?" I ask. I get really mean when they look inside the cockpit while the aircraft is moving. I bet the pilots on board the 380 wish they were going slower and that at least one of them had their eyes outside the cockpit. They will probably not be flying the flagship 380 anymore and are luck they didn't kill ground personnel (which could have easily happened).

littlewheelinback wrote:So, when I teach tailwheel flying I am always nagging my students to slow down while taxying...sometimes I even use bad language. "Why are you in such a hurry?" I ask. I get really mean when they look inside the cockpit while the aircraft is moving. I bet the pilots on board the 380 wish they were going slower and that at least one of them had their eyes outside the cockpit. They will probably not be flying the flagship 380 anymore and are luck they didn't kill ground personnel (which could have easily happened).

Ya I agree for that size of ship it looked like it was moving a bit too fast for the amount of equipment around on the ramp. That nose wheel on the Bombardier traveled probably 75'-100' in about 1-2 sec if there had of been anyone by it or in its path they most likely have left the scene in a body bag. I think 75' in 1 sec is the equivalent of 70mph if I'm doing the math right.

I'm not a physics major but I still think the energy was more extreme at the cockpit than over the mains of the Bombardier where it was just pivoting. Just the same I wouldn't want to have been that plane period.

The captain I flew with today made a good point, so allow me to play devil's advocate here for a second and to add some info on taxiing speeds.

First taxiing speeds: Being based out of JFK and flying frequently to LAX (two places the A380 and other heavies frequent) usually you see them being taxied fairly slowly. That being said, I know that our company allows normal taxi speeds to be upward of 30 knots and is done regularly, slower for contaminated conditions. Now I don't know what Air Frances policy is, or if there is a specific policy for the A380, but it isn't out of the realm of possibility that they were within their allowed taxi speed.

Next, is the point of watching their wing tips. I will admit I have never been on an A380, but seeing their wingtips may not be very easy. On many of the jets I've flown, you can't see the wingtip without doing some far forward and side leaning and craning your head back. Cameras aren't a bad idea for something that size. You would think maybe the AF CA would have seen him and thought, "Ow, he might be a bit close." But again, that goes to visibility of the wingtip from the cockpit.

Now to the point my captain made, with the other things above in mind, if he was on centerline, which it appears he was, and was following his taxi instructions, that will probably weigh in their favor. I'm not saying that he is completely blameless, but I am saying that there will probably at the very least some shared responsibility between him, ground controllers, and maybe even the ramp controllers. I would think that, with A380s and other large aircraft operating on the airport, there is a spot on the ramp that is the minimum aircraft need to be in to assure that they are out of the wingtip clearance area of those larger aircraft.

Personally, I think the Comair slipped through the cracks. Ground didn't know he had stopped short of the gate and assumed he was clear since he had headed to his ramp/gate and possibly changed freqs. Ramp tells him to hold short, or the CA holds short because he is waiting for his parking space to be readied, and the Air France CA continues to follow his taxi instructions assuming that he has a clear path. It would be interesting to hear the view points from all involved and to hear the whole ATC tape and hear exactly what instructions were given to both aircraft.

I wonder if the automatic voice control called the Capt a "Retard..Retard" after contact.

Grasstrippilot has good points. If they were cleared, they can say that they were cleared. I can't begin to appreciate the size of the aircraft they were wheeling around (the biggest AC I've flown is the DHC-6 Twin Otter) and how hard it must be to judge the wing tip's clearance. I also can understand that no pilot has yet to gain a great amount of experience in the 380, it just hasn't been in service very long. The taxi speed may well be within company limits.

However, even in the air a pilot is expected to see and avoid other aircraft when visibility permits. I also think that when space is narrow it would be smart to slow the hell down. It is a general rule of the road that when one vehicle is stopped, a moving vehicle has the responsibility to avoid it. I bet they end up getting some time off...oh wait it's Air France...maybe not.

I forgot what news report I heard this from. But apparently JFK got an exemption to not have to widen their taxi ways from 75 feet to 100 feet (A380 requirement). Does anybody know if this is true? Who knows if that was even a factor