| The Aviation Herald | Last Update: Tuesday, Nov 12th 2024 21:01Z 31027 Articles available Events from Mar 23rd 1994 to Nov 12th 2024 | ||
| www.avherald.com | Incidents and News in Aviation | ||
 |  | List by: |  |  | Filter: |  |  |  |  |  |
|
|
Accident: JAL A359 at Tokyo on Jan 2nd 2024, collided with Coast Guard DH8C on runway and burst into flames
Reader Comments: (the comments posted below do not reflect the view of The Aviation Herald but represent the view of the various posters) Still no report? By Brian Johnson on Saturday, Oct 26th 2024 13:50Z Not even a preliminary report after 9 months?
Are there not international legal requirements to produce reports within certain time limits? Japanese authority questioning JAL By Keith Sketchley on Tuesday, May 28th 2024 19:20Z Japanese officials are 'on JAL's case' about a spate of problems including the Dash8 disaster at Haneda.
Five cases are mentioned by my aviation media source, including wing touches between aircraft on ground and one more case of aircraft entering runway without authorization. But the disaster at Haneda resulted from the JCG's Dash 8 entering a runway without clearance and the airport not fixing its system that would have warned controllers. Tanslation accuracy By Keith Sketchley on Friday, May 24th 2024 14:36Z I know that there are people who understand technology and both languages well so can translate accurately.
I know that Canadian investigators have stumbled, and do not put much effort into investigating relatively minor incidents nor crashes of small airplanes. The turbulence and small airplane reports I criticized seem as though the 'B Team' wrote them, perhaps newbies, perhaps just people who should not have the job. Japan has bureaucracies, some are obstinate, one contributed to the disaster at Haneda. @ Keith Sketchley on Wednesday, Feb 28th 2024 19:46Z By Simon Hradecky on Thursday, Feb 29th 2024 12:59Z The translation by the JTSB is a lot better than if any reader (pilot, cabin crew, passenger, management, ...) attempts to translate the Japanese text himself (with or without the help of translation software). The Japanese investigator knows what he is talking about rather than guessing by the reader what this might be about. English is not their native language, and most English people do not have any similiar knowledge of Japanese. I commend the Japanese investigators for offering the English reports for the benefit of all around the planet!
While vibrating or shaking may not be the best words for describing the movement of the aircraft in (severe) turbulence, they are still perfectly understandable. Caution about translation By Keith Sketchley on Wednesday, Feb 28th 2024 19:46Z Useful translation requires fluency in both languages and significant knowledge of the subject, including a good vocabulary, in my experience.
JTSB doesn't always have that - its report on a small airplane mishap and its report on a passenger injured from falling on a seat armrest when the airplane 'vibrated' in flight are examples @Norm: Pilot Monitoring By WhoCares on Thursday, Feb 8th 2024 08:00Z @Norm: Thanks for some insight in the problems of using the HUD at night.
One thing that is not clear from your posts, and something that might well be a airline specific regulation: do both pilot flying and monitoring have the HUD active at the same time during final approach? There would be the obvious benefit of PM not, so that he has the clear uncluttered/light-poluted view. But then, in case he has to take over in case of emergency, it would make more sense to already have the HUD properly setup... Last Follow up of Landing vis through HUD By Norm on Tuesday, Feb 6th 2024 01:10Z Now the simplest i see to fix the problem IHMO is to mandate and fit tail light fixture with a high intensity blue irregularly flashing light slightly angled upward that works from strobes switch and weight on wheel. Then, on touchdown, the approach traffic will have a very definite specific and unobstructed id on whats on the runway and where. Same for in position and hold traffic before you land). All that good technology is in the wayf of pilots clear view and landing traffic separation is now back to a single man show, that is, the already tasked loaded controller. Fly safe.
Follow up of Landing vis through HUD By Norm on Tuesday, Feb 6th 2024 01:09Z It is forcing you to reset HUD intensity sometimes more than once in the final stages of landing, thereby alternating between thrust lever and intensity knob (techno burden). The EVS system won't likely make their way to commercial cockpits for a good while (cost/weight). So we are left with the technology as is, i personally mitigate by having a quick peak on the side of the HUD on short final to make sure the other guy is off the runway. I fly a lot of high density heavy traffic locations where the spacing is tight and totally get why JAL pilots could not pick the Dash. [last follow up i promise]
Visibility through HUD on night landing By Norm on Tuesday, Feb 6th 2024 01:08Z I've been flying with HUD aircraft (787 and A220 ) for the last 8 years and Glenn Doolan touches the bullseye in its comment. This is a technology design induced accident. The color, symbology, coating (which reflects green as intended but also washes out 80%+ of outside green wavelenght) are a real obstacle for locating dimly lighted airplane backend. Although probably not the case for Haneda 34R (haven't been there in while), the advent of LED runway lighting which are single wavelenght makes the depth perception close to impossible mixed with the HUD symbols and also triggers exagerated HUD intensity changes when the sensor gets saturated. [follow up in next post]
small typo By nico on Thursday, Jan 25th 2024 17:46Z Simon, a small typo:
On Jan 7th 2024 (UTC) runway 34R was returned to service at MIGHTNIGHT i guess that should be midnight :) please feel free to delete my comment after correction Category By (anonymous) on Thursday, Jan 25th 2024 12:24Z I must admit I was initially, and remain with time, surprised that this is only an "Accident". I would have thought this was certainly a "Crash", as every single soul aboard both airplanes was deeply threatened, and that there was even a single survivor (nevermind multiple hundreds) involves a lot of luck (and a lot of great engineering).
Indeed the recent Canadian crash involves the loss of all-but-one, and the Dash 8 here also suffered all-but-one, yet this one is somehow categorized as less severe. Of course I only say all this because I love this site, so thank you Simon regardless. Tis my goto site for news. @Enhanced Vision By Littlebirds737 on Wednesday, Jan 24th 2024 18:26Z A company just certified an EFVS on the 737NG platform last month. Would almost guarantee that pilots would have been able to see an aircraft on the runway with any EFVS.
lack of technology By Lee on Wednesday, Jan 24th 2024 17:37Z This is NOT an aircraft specific issue - this is caused by the airport authority, NOT investing in proper runway incursion and alerting equipment. This equipment has saved countless hull losses in north america.
People WILL make mistakes and the cost of such mistakes is easily counted in the hundreds of millions of dollars. The cost of the equipment, is not. They have a system that SHOWS the controllers where an aircraft is, but NO automated alerting system of any kind. Even small airports here in Canada have this FFS. JCG airplane was on departure frequency By Keith Sketchley on Wednesday, Jan 24th 2024 16:31Z I read that the Japan Coast Guard airplane was on tower departure frequency and interacting with ATC.
(Some suggestion too tersely, with some small potential for confusing meaning of 'you are number 1' or such. I understand JCG base is at the airport thus its crews should be familiar with ATC there.) It would have various radios of course, to communicate with emergency service agencies at scenes of need. (Interoperability of their communication radios is being improved in Canada-US so I expect in Japan too.) CVR readout should illuminate any confusion in flight deck of JCG airplane. @ Diev, Control freq By jjk on Tuesday, Jan 23rd 2024 16:14Z �I'm confused. Is the ATC using different frequencies for the arriving and departing traffic on the same RWY? If not the JAL landing clearance would have been heard by the Dash's crew.�
S&R aircrafts use different frequency bands than commercial traffic does. This avoids interference, but also cross-communication. Can�t ADSB help to make a difference ? By Jan on Sunday, Jan 21st 2024 20:49Z Should we not be able to use ADSB to get ground and the flight crews aware that the runway is occupied ? And for instance the runway lights being changed to make clear that the someone is already there and the arrival get a clear signal to make a go around. Same saying to inform the intruder aware of his mistake and initiate a clearance to the landing surface? As it is reported that the automatic airport monitoring detected the runway intrusion, there should be more than a blink at some controller screen. And it�s possible with the technology we�ve already at most airports anyway.
TCAS By Diev on Saturday, Jan 20th 2024 15:55Z Oh, and by the way, are Dash AC fitted with a TCAS screen of a sort? Didn't they noticed the landing traffic? The parralel RWY is quite far.
On the other hand, I'm gettig quite nervous when on short final and SO on the ground have their TCAS on. Finding the AC with the TCAS on becomes Prio #1, stable flightpath goes to #2. I can imagine it would be the same with the JAL crew. Perhaps, the TCAS was not switched on at all? Control freq By Diev on Saturday, Jan 20th 2024 15:30Z I'm confused. Is the ATC using different frequencies for the arriving and departing traffic on the same RWY? If not the JAL landing clearance would have been heard by the Dash's crew.
Enhanced Vision By John Chew on Thursday, Jan 18th 2024 23:15Z Is the A350 fitted with Enhanced Vision from an Infrared Camera?
Many corporate jets have these. Having experienced these systems in Cirrus aircraft and Royal Flying Doctor Service KingAirs I believe that they would show the heat from the Dash 8's engines on the runway and most likely the shape of the Dash 8. The Royal Flying Doctor Service introduced this to alert the crew to animal incursions on landing at night on remote strips. In the Cirrus I observed the heat from a freshly started C152 engine at night from 300m away. Possible reduction of information by HUD combiner By Keith Sketchley on Monday, Jan 15th 2024 20:32Z Any surface has potential to reduce light coming through it.
Your personal example may be eyeglasses which can have anti-reflective coating. As cockpit instruments did in the 1960s, at least from Boeing. Mitigations include: - anti-reflective coating - quiet dark flight deck (a trend started years ago, shouldn't even be 'status normal' annunciators only exception lights, with two crew flight deck no instrument lights behind pilots but may be some on overhead panel). Note that HUDs have advanced over the past few decades, they were green, I don't know if they have colour today. @Glenn Doolan By Sergio on Monday, Jan 15th 2024 13:00Z Glen, thank you very much for sharing this. It is interesting the following: "The iconography of the HUD is the same color as many airport lights, leading to confusion", so seems to be that all the info is cluttered and masked. I used HUDs at the Air Force and I don�t remember so many inconveniences. Thank you very much. This would explain why if the Dash8 went unnoticed even if lighted (again, the lightning is very poor and it is masked by the bright TDZ lights at the runway, now let�s add the HUD to this equation).
HUD Air Safety Report By Glen Doolan on Monday, Jan 15th 2024 10:39Z I have 2305 hours on the A350. In 2018 I submitted an ASR to my company regarding this issue of the HUD.
------------------------ ASR submitted as follows ------------------------ "On the A350, the HUD can significantly restrict visibility, especially at night. This is due to a number of reasons. 1. The residual glow of the projector unit, even at minimum brightness, reduces visibility through the screen. 2. The combiner unit screen reflects the ambient light in the cockpit. 3. The combiner unit screen refracts the image of the PFD. 4. Dust and fingerprints on the screen further impede visibility. 5. The iconography of the HUD is the same color as many airport lights, leading to confusion. 6. When on path, the FPV, FD, FPA and Energy Chevrons all obscure the runway environment. Especially the PAPI and TDZ. The use of the HUD should be at the discretion of the crew, as and when it is safe and appropriate." @captn crunch By Sergio on Sunday, Jan 14th 2024 17:31Z Thanks for the message. So we have a different opinion on where the Dash 8 was when the 350 broke off. In any case, I still stand to my words as for my experience: Dash 8 at night is very difficult to see, put that into a fully lighted and bright runway, top it with HUD and you have a whole recipe for disaster.
On the other side, I am glad at the US nothing has happened yet, but unfortunately they are playing right at the edge. For everybodys well being hope nothing happens, but a full rethinking about ATC should be made: priority is safety, not making numbers of landings. @Sergio; I'm still having trouble following your math By Captain Crunch on Sunday, Jan 14th 2024 10:18Z Sergio said:
"The fact that the Dash 8 was standing there for 40s still amidst a bright runway, and that when they broke clouds the Dash was already there made them very difficult to see the Dash" CC says: I kinda doubt that. I think that when JAL516 broke out of the clouds, the Dash-8 was still near C-5. There was an 8kt headwind, which was likely even greater up high. I think at 6.5 miles out JAL516 broke out and was about 1950 ft and 3.25 mins or 195 secs from impact. So he had already broken out if reported weather matched actual, and, if so, the Dash-8 didn't roll onto the runway for several minutes after that (155secs after JAL516's breakout.) But I still agree it would have been very difficult to detect him in a bright bus cockpit with HUD and bright ALS lighting on 34R. The USA aviation system is the safest in the world. A single man died in 100s of US ATC airports in a dozen years. At least seven have died in just Tokyo airports alone in the same time frame, AFAIK. Cheers Landing lights By Lynx8 on Saturday, Jan 13th 2024 12:02Z Just a quick one: is it normal that the landing lights, especially in a 30km visibility at night, do not allow pilots to see an aircraft at the touch down point, even if only 100 mt ahead of it?
If yes, many observations should be considered and not going into obvious details... @captn crunch By Sergio on Saturday, Jan 13th 2024 08:32Z The fact that the Dash 8 was standing there for 40s still amidst a bright runway, and that when they broke clouds the Dash was already there made them very difficult to see the Dash, specially if they were using a HUD. The statement that "the incidents you refer to are typically not even investigated in many parts of the world when they happen." is very poor coming from a place like the States. I am not buying it. They will have to admit one day that in US ATC is driven by numbers and revenue.
@ Sergio; I don't understand your New Math By Captain Crunch on Saturday, Jan 13th 2024 01:36Z O.K., let's just say JAL516 was 2.5 nm from the end of the runway x 3 degree glideslope = 750 feet, not 1000 feet as you said.
Right? Is there something I'm missing here? I've been in the Armchair for a lot of years! So why can't you see landing lights at 750 feet? The weather is a few at 2000. The FAF is way out at 11.9 nm from touchdown, so he's coming straight in over Tokyo Bay according to the track I saw. I agree with you that sequence number is important for calculating crossing restrictions, clearance void times, fuel burn, de-ice hold-over times, etc. It's a ridiculous knee-jerk reaction that Tokyo airport has banned that verbiage, IMHO. US ATC is frustrating, I'll agree. But you just can't argue with no fatalities in nearly a dozen years with millions of ops. I think one person died at Dutch Harbor Alaska with wild wind shear, but that's it. In my experience, the incidents you refer to are typically not even investigated in many parts of the world when they happen. Sergio By Jetman on Friday, Jan 12th 2024 22:18Z " Hope this makes sense "
Yes this can be an explanation but let see what final report will tell Tks @jetman By Sergio on Friday, Jan 12th 2024 19:49Z The question should be why the Dash 8 entered the runway without clearance? Anyway, answering your question, from real experience I can say it is very difficult to see a Dash 8 from behind because their outside lights are not as shiny as the jets ones. Now add this to a fully lit runway, touchdown zone is super bright, the Dash is static, so you cannot see anything there. Imagine you spotted their lights, as they are stopped it can be mistaken for runway lights as well. If the Airbus was using HUDs, the lights are blurred artificially so as not to blind you. Hope this makes sense.
Sergio By Jetman on Friday, Jan 12th 2024 18:39Z The question is why the Airbus crew did not see the A/C on the runway, if the Dash crew respected the basic procedure before entering the runway and the about ATC com and unability to avoid the accident.
Lets wait for the final report to clarify and bring appropriate procedure. Only the most recent 30 comments are shown to reduce server load. Click here to show the remaining comments You are not allowed to post comments |
The Aviation Herald Apps Android and iOS 
Support The Aviation Herald Euro
US$
Interview:
|
| Get the news right onto your desktop when they happen |  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
© 2008-2024 by The Aviation Herald, all rights reserved, reprint and republishing prohibited. We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our site, learn more.