TSB investigating after 2 private jets crash on the ground at Winnipeg airport

[Bushed]

The Transportation Safety Board is investigating after two planes crashed at Winnipeg James Armstrong Richardson International Airport Sunday.

In a release the TSB says the crash happened on the ground between two private jets, and a team of two investigators are en route to Winnipeg to gather information and assess what happened.

The TSB says no injuries were reported.

Winnipeg Airports Authority spokesperson Tyler MacAfee says the crash happened around 3:30 p.m. and one of the planes was stationary at the time.

He says crews were able to contain a fuel leak from at least one of the planes caused by the crash.

The TSB is an independent agency that investigates marine, pipeline, railway and aviation transportation occurrences.

More from CBC Manitoba:

FF9DFDFC-DD0E-46A3-86B4-E5A779A69BD6.jpeg (58.17 KiB) Viewed 9560 times

[Schooner69A]

I'm gobsmacked...

[pdw]

+1

[upnatem]

Program shit into your radios and screens before you start to move the aircraft!!

[linecrew]

Program shit into your radios and screens before you start to move the aircraft!!

Got 'er all figured out already?

[bobcaygeon]

I heard it was a TC Citation.......

[upnatem]

Program shit into your radios and screens before you start to move the aircraft!!

Got 'er all figured out already?

Yeah, pretty much. Let me know when you find out I'm wrong.

[linecrew]

Program shit into your radios and screens before you start to move the aircraft!!

Got 'er all figured out already?

Yeah, pretty much. Let me know when you find out I'm wrong.

Sounds like you have the inside scoop...care to share with the rest of us?

[linecrew]

I heard it was a TC Citation.......

It appears to have an American registration:

[upnatem]

Got 'er all figured out already?

Yeah, pretty much. Let me know when you find out I'm wrong.

Sounds like you have the inside scoop...care to share with the rest of us?

Let's see.......clear day, middle of afternoon, taxis directly into (no wingtip brush here) a parked aircraft. How much "inside scoop" do you need to figure out they weren't looking outside.

[contactapproved]

Didn’t witness it but heard the citation was crossing perpendicular in front of the challenger and clipped the nosegear with its wingtip swinging itself into the right wing of the challenger. Single pilot in the citation maybe that thought they had more room than they did??? Perhaps got waved off a little soon by the marshaller(if they even had one). Haven’t been there recently but it seems like since the ownership change at this FBO the level of service and attention level of the ramp staff have diminished.

[FlyGy]

I heard it was a TC Citation.......

It appears to have an American registration:

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N4A ... /CYYC/CYWG

[linecrew]

...How much "inside scoop" do you need to figure out they weren't looking outside.

Eyewitnesses vice hearsay/speculation. Subsequent posts imply the Citation was single pilot and misjudged wing clearance. Reads a bit different from your accusatory first post on the subject that said "Program shit into your radios and screens before you start to move the aircraft!!", although still a boner move on the pilot's part.

[Diadem]

Misjudged wing clearance?! He hit the Challenger ten feet inboard of the wingtip! He put the nose of his own plane almost into the nose of the Challenger!

[FlyGy]

Misjudged wing clearance?! He hit the Challenger ten feet inboard of the wingtip! He put the nose of his own plane almost into the nose of the Challenger!

Orrrrr...you could read the thread. Specifically, this post

viewtopic.php?p=1037090#p1037090

Take a look at the nose gear on the Citation.

[Diadem]

That doesn't explain anything. No pilot should be blindly following the directions of a marshaller and hitting another airplane, and I don't know how the wingtip could hit the nose gear during normal taxiing. The pilot is always responsible for where the airplane taxis, and unless both the steering and brakes broke at the same time then the pilot messed up.
This attitude that pilots can do no wrong and are never responsible for incidents is tiresome and needs to stop.

[Cliff Jumper]

You guy already have it all figured out, You've eliminated allllll other possibilities,... well done.

Extra marks for upandatem, he got there first.

The chances of it being something else, like a brake failure, are effectively zero.

[complexintentions]

That doesn't explain anything. No pilot should be blindly following the directions of a marshaller and hitting another airplane, and I don't know how the wingtip could hit the nose gear during normal taxiing. The pilot is always responsible for where the airplane taxis, and unless both the steering and brakes broke at the same time then the pilot messed up.
This attitude that pilots can do no wrong and are never responsible for incidents is tiresome and needs to stop.

Well, yes. And no. On our aircraft we cannot physically see our wingtips so we do have to depend on marshallers, wing walkers, and electronic guidance systems. If they give faulty guidance there are definitely situations where we'll hit things without being able to prevent it. Not sure how you could claim that we "messed up" in such a situation. But it IS fun to make sweeping judgemental statements, isn't it?

I do agree that driving an airplane right into another one you can see, just because an marshaller indicates to do so, is somewhat problematic.

[FlyGy]

You guy already have it all figured out, You've eliminated allllll other possibilities,... well done.

Extra marks for upandatem, he got there first.

The chances of it being something else, like a brake failure, are effectively zero.

Actually, I'm entirely in agreement with you. My post was meant to highlight that there are other possibilities out there and no one on these boards knows what happened.

[North Shore]

Further info: https://aviation-safety.net/database/re ... 0180415-2

[pelmet]

Well, yes. And no. On our aircraft we cannot physically see our wingtips so we do have to depend on marshallers, wing walkers, and electronic guidance systems. If they give faulty guidance there are definitely situations where we'll hit things without being able to prevent it. Not sure how you could claim that we "messed up" in such a situation.

Misleading at best.....

In the end, it is really just good judgement and average skill that is required. The idea that not being able to see your wingtips means that you "have to depend on marshallers" is not entirely true. I have been on a tight-spaced ramp plenty of times in an aircraft with no wingtips visible from the cockpit where a 180 degree turn was required. It was a regular stop for us with aircraft parked very close to where we were maneuvering and no marshaller available for guidance until you have turned around and are facing him at which point you finally get some marshalling for the least risky portion of the entire parking maneuver....straight to the final stopping point. Meanwhile there have been wing clearance issues and blast issues during the majority of the maneuver into the ramp that was done without the marshaller.

Bottom line(and to clarify), there are operations and situations out there on a regular basis where aircraft having wingtips their pilot can't see are maneuvering in relatively confined locations. Admittedly, this is normally airlines at smaller airports or business jets on tight ramps intead of the widebodies which seem to have mostly major airport/airline style taxi-in situations. And depending on the situation, these aircraft do not necessarily require marshallers for all maneuvering in confined areas as was stated earlier. If things look tight, then most of us have stopped at one point and gotten help. There may be a lot more to this incident than simply misjudging wing clearance.

Speaking about the standard parking at the gate maneuver, I do try to remember to look for the aircraft type on the electronic guidance and that the ramp is clear even if being marshalled/guided in. Here is what can happen if you completely "depend" on marshalling/signals and don't take a look for stuff accidentally left on the ramp(usually inside angled yellow demarcation lines)...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vu2xQLEE8a4

[anofly]

it says control was lost. i wonder if the cessna steering failed? one pic seemed to show like heavy frost on the ground? or was i dreaming?
sad day any which way you look at it....

[upnatem]

Thanks "linecrew", you've made me realize the error of my ways - and I feel shame. I will no longer expect pilots to look out the windows while taxiing and make sure they aren't going to hit anything with their aircraft.

If you happened to be the guy marshalling him I hope you gave him a big hug and told him it wasn't his fault.

[Cliff Jumper]

So, to recap, upandatem, ....definitely not a brake failure, definitely pilot distraction?

[GyvAir]

CADORS Number:
2018C1455
Occurrence Summary
Date Entered:
2018-04-20
Narrative:
An American privately registered Cessna 550 and a Morningstar Partners Bombardier CL-600-2B16 (C-FXWT) collided on an uncontrolled apron at Winnipeg/James Armstrong Richardson Int'l, MB (CYWG). One of the aircraft began to leak fuel and Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) responded. Apron 2 was closed by the airport authority. No operational impact.