JAL aircraft on fire in Japan

[CharlieOneSix]

BBC News showing a JAL aircraft on fire at Haneda airport. Apparently it collided with a Coastguard aircraft on landing. 367 passengers and crew on the JAL aircraft - reports that all did escape.

[Boac]

Sky News have a video which is quite alarming, although there are signs of an evacuation. https://news.sky.com/story/plane-in-fla ... t-13040799

[CharlieOneSix]

Coastguard say 5 out of 6 on board their aircraft have not been accounted for. Seems it was a Bombardier Dash 8 which is based at Haneda.

[CharlieOneSix]

Video of the evacuation……

https://x.com/tshinfuku1115/status/1742 ... 21198?s=20

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Bits of video here, from BOAC's Sky News post, showing the landing rollout and inside the cabin

[OFSO]

A350. Amazing that crew and px managed to get out.

[Wodrick]

SM an ex training cabin staff lady, reckon the Cabin Staff must have been SO well drilled to get that many off through only two doors, they did incredibly well.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Didn't see any of the pax carrying bags, dallying about, etc.
Doubtless a reasonable set of pax makes a heck of a difference.

[Ex-Ascot]

Didn't see any of the pax carrying bags, dallying about, etc.
Doubtless a reasonable set of pax makes a heck of a difference.

Japanese discipline.

Seems that the coastguard was told to hold. The pilot who escaped will throw himself of his sword.

[Karearea]

blancolirio: Haneda Collision 2 Jan 2024 [10:54]

[Ex-Ascot]

Thank you Karearea that was fast. He makes the point that the aircraft on the runway at night would be difficult to see by the JAL. However the landing lights from the JAL would be very easy to see from the Coast Guard. Also he entered by a perpendicular taxiway not a fast turn on so a clear view up the approach. He didn't look. I look even as a passenger in our puddle jumpers.

Does seem as if ATC were a bit nebulous but I would not take that as a clearance to enter.

Re. cabin bags; There is a girl in the photo on screen at 6.10 with a rucksack on, well either that or a parachute.

[tango15]

I gather from more recent information on Aviation Herald, that the 350 and the Dash were on two different frequencies. Whatever other constituents to the holes in the Swiss cheese there are, this has to be a major factor. Many pilots on TOP are complaining that the use of HUD obscures the view, particularly on landing.

[Ex-Ascot]

I gather from more recent information on Aviation Herald, that the 350 and the Dash were on two different frequencies. Whatever other constituents to the holes in the Swiss cheese there are, this has to be a major factor. Many pilots on TOP are complaining that the use of HUD obscures the view, particularly on landing.

Perhaps the Coast Guard was still on ground. In which case he wouldn't expect clearance to enter from them.

[llondel]

Thank you Karearea that was fast. He makes the point that the aircraft on the runway at night would be difficult to see by the JAL. However the landing lights from the JAL would be very easy to see from the Coast Guard. Also he entered by a perpendicular taxiway not a fast turn on so a clear view up the approach. He didn't look. I look even as a passenger in our puddle jumpers.

There was the LAX incident 30 years ago where an incoming aircraft took out the one waiting on the runway. I think they did a test as part of the investigation of putting the same model there and flew an approach and it was pretty much invisible even when actively looking for it.

I have been looking closely at the videos of the crash and can't see the Dash 8 at all - you can see the landing lights of the A350, but nothing I could identify as nav lights on the Dash 8. I would be interested to know whether the Dash 8 was sideways on (as in, still moving) or had entered the runway and turned ready for takeoff, and how long he'd been there if so.

[tango15]

When I was working in ops at MAN for one of the handling agents, I had to do my airfield driving course. All common-sense stuff and quite straightforward really, but one thing we were warned about was to watch the Flybe Dash 8s at night. The position of the lighting, including the anti-colls, was such that from certain angles you couldn't see them at night, so you didn't know for sure whether the aircraft was being pushed back or not. I remember that a colleague was almost caught out one summer evening.
The CAA had been advised about the situation, but for reasons best known to themselves, had done nothing about it. The Japan Coast Guard aircraft was one of the later models, but I have no idea whether the lighting positions had been altered on them.

[PHXPhlyer]

Thank you Karearea that was fast. He makes the point that the aircraft on the runway at night would be difficult to see by the JAL. However the landing lights from the JAL would be very easy to see from the Coast Guard. Also he entered by a perpendicular taxiway not a fast turn on so a clear view up the approach. He didn't look. I look even as a passenger in our puddle jumpers.

There was the LAX incident 30 years ago where an incoming aircraft took out the one waiting on the runway. I think they did a test as part of the investigation of putting the same model there and flew an approach and it was pretty much invisible even when actively looking for it.

I have been looking closely at the videos of the crash and can't see the Dash 8 at all - you can see the landing lights of the A350, but nothing I could identify as nav lights on the Dash 8. I would be interested to know whether the Dash 8 was sideways on (as in, still moving) or had entered the runway and turned ready for takeoff, and how long he'd been there if so.

That was a SkyWest Metroliner "in position and hold"ing as it was called back then which was basically landed on by a US Airways 737.
The local controller had simply forgotten that the Metro was holding.
The result of that accident was a change that prevented controllers from issuing position and hold clearances at night.

PP

[PHXPhlyer]

Another excellent analysis by Juan.
This are the first closeup photos of the damage to the 350 that I have seen.

PP

[CharlieOneSix]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-67874607

[llondel]

That does tend to point at the Dash 8 pilot. Either he failed to stop where he intended, or he misunderstood where he was supposed to stop, given that it was in English and I assume not his first language. Exchanges I've heard elsewhere add "hold short of runway XX" for good measure, to make it quite clear.

[OFSO]

Agree. My local airport always adds the word "hold" followed by "short" or "clear of the runway". Watching cockpit videos on the 'tube, I notice that when subsequently cleared for take-off, air crew invariably look both ways before moving onto the active.