JAL A350 collision & fire

[Bede]

[https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/japan-air ... -1.7072315

[YouTube]https://youtu.be/IV3YkXxq1mM?si=SO4wRfOppC4OLuIk[/YouTube]

Live ATC around 15 min mark https://archive.liveatc.net/rjtt/RJTT-T ... -0830Z.mp3

[CL-Skadoo!]

I’m not sure what I was expecting when I saw that headline, but the condition of that A350 sure caught me off guard. Incredible work by the JAL flight attendants to get everyone out quickly without losing anyone; true professionals.

[digits_]

Wow. Here I was expecting a picture of 2 scratched wing tips.

Very factual headline and reporting in the CBC article. That's nice to see.

Did the A350 clip the dash 8 as the dash 8 was entering the runway?

[truecolours]

Looking at the video, taxi chart, and atc, it looks like the coast guard was expecting an intersection departure, but given a hold short. If you slow the video down, you can see the dash 8 strobes moving at time of impact.

[goldeneagle]

Bad couple of days in Japan. The Coast Guard plane was on earthquake relief tasking, gotta wonder how much that played into this event.

[rigpiggy]

Looking at the radar traces most arrival were on 34L and de partures on 34Ri noticed at time of accident a simultaneous approach on both the L &R. Also it was a coastguard aircraft and wasn't broadcasting ads-b. FFS I fly in the USA all the time and their fighter jets broadcast ads-b until operational(cya(m). Also all of the fire suppression and medevac planes should be running it too. Rant out...

[boeingboy]

There is some unconfirmed info that the two aircraft were on 2 different frequencies...

Avherald...

According to ATC recordings the A359 as well as a number of other aircraft departing runway 34R were handed off to Tower Frequency 118.725MHz, however, the Coast Guard DH8C was handed off to tower at 124.350MHz. JL-516, upon being handed off to tower by approach, was told by tower to "continue approach", about 90 seconds later tower cleared the aircraft to land.

Having never flown to Tokyo I don't know the frequencies used - however looking up some charts it appears both are valid tower frequencies. Maybe ATC got confused as to where he (Coast guard) was...

[Eric Janson]

PPRuNe thread on this accident

https://www.pprune.org/accidents-close- ... rt-15.html

Post #297 first video gives an aerial view of the runway.

-A350 sitting in the grass on the RHS of Rwy 34R - just the wings and part of the stab remaining.
-Dash 8 sitting on the centreline just N of taxiway C5. Not recognisable as an aircraft.

From personal experience aircraft on the runway in the lit touchdown zone are almost impossible to see - even if you know they're there.

[Dias]

Always be extra cautious around any aircraft operated by a government. The pilots are usually much less experienced than they would be operating commercially. Military, Coast Guard, Politicians, Police, etc. I believe RCMP are an exception. They hire commercial pilots.

[EPR]

Why is it that several.. (not all), well documented crashes, that happen on the airport grounds result in frustratingly slow, and confused rescue/fire response? Like half the time, the fire fighters can't seem to get there hoses charged, for an exceedingly long time!

[digits_]

Why is it that several.. (not all), well documented crashes, that happen on the airport grounds result in frustratingly slow, and confused rescue/fire response? Like half the time, the fire fighters can't seem to get there hoses charged, for an exceedingly long time!

Let's say you get to spend one flight a week in the simulator. 3 years later you get to fly a real airplane for the first time. How efficient do you think you'll be? Oh yeah, people will die if you take too long. But if you rush you run the risk of killing lots of them as well...

[EPR]

Well...I don't know how I feel about that, other than "I trained to my best abilities" and hopefully it results in a favourable outcome! As "rusty"as I may be, it's still not as frustratingly slow as some recently well documented fire/rescue responses on field!

[digits_]

Well...I don't know how I feel about that, other than "I trained to my best abilities" and hopefully it results in a favourable outcome! As "rusty"as I may be, it's still not as frustratingly slow as some recently well documented fire/rescue responses on field!

Which accident are you referring to exactly as an example of a slow response? I couldn't find anything about this one specifically.

[BMLtech]

I thought it was interesting that ARFF was unable to knock down this largely composite fire, burned for hours. Looks like they burn similar to EV's once lit.

[mmm...bacon]

I’m not sure what I was expecting when I saw that headline, but the condition of that A350 sure caught me off guard. Incredible work by the JAL flight attendants to get everyone out quickly without losing anyone; true professionals.

I’ve head somewhere about 96 seconds for a total evacuation - Pretty good going for an unplanned event…

[digits_]

Some pictures show the plane off the side of the runway. Any idea how that happened? The inside videos gave the impression they still had directional control.

[BTD]

I’m not sure what I was expecting when I saw that headline, but the condition of that A350 sure caught me off guard. Incredible work by the JAL flight attendants to get everyone out quickly without losing anyone; true professionals.

I’ve head somewhere about 96 seconds for a total evacuation - Pretty good going for an unplanned event…

According to avherald the last person got off the A350 18 mins after the collision.

[pelmet]

I’m not sure what I was expecting when I saw that headline, but the condition of that A350 sure caught me off guard. Incredible work by the JAL flight attendants to get everyone out quickly without losing anyone; true professionals.

I’ve head somewhere about 96 seconds for a total evacuation - Pretty good going for an unplanned event…

According to avherald the last person got off the A350 18 mins after the collision.

It can be easy to be misled, and come to erroneous conclusions, by what one sees on the news based on the media showing only the highlights. We see video of the landing with explosion then we see the A350 engulfed in flames. People come to a conclusion that they were in quick sequence. Therefore, they conclude that if everybody on the A350 survived, the evacuation must have been very rapid.

Reminds me of 9/11. I saw something on AvCanada about a small plane hitting the WTC. I searched the news and saw some ominous stories. I scrambled down to turn on the TV and saw playback video of an airliner hitting the tower and then the collapses right after that. Based on the assumption that they collapsed almost immediately, I remember saying out loud “That must be ten thousand people dead”. It is sad when one is happy that only three thousand people died.

[BTD]

Didn’t avCanada start 2004 ish?

[pelmet]

Didn’t avCanada start 2004 ish?

Maybe it was another forum then. Perhaps AEF.

[cdnavater]

I thought it was interesting that ARFF was unable to knock down this largely composite fire, burned for hours. Looks like they burn similar to EV's once lit.

I’ve never seen a fire hydrant airside, so from that I assume the ARFF are not equipped with enough fluid to extinguish a large fire. I figure they are only trying to slow it down enough for everyone to escape, after that they let her burn.

[Eric Janson]

I’ve never seen a fire hydrant airside, so from that I assume the ARFF are not equipped with enough fluid to extinguish a large fire. I figure they are only trying to slow it down enough for everyone to escape, after that they let her burn.

That makes sense - no point in risking lives once everyone is off the aircraft. There is still a risk of a fuel tank explosion.

The smoke/fumes are probably toxic as well.

Hopefully the final report will provide clarity.

[pelmet]

I’ve never seen a fire hydrant airside, so from that I assume the ARFF are not equipped with enough fluid to extinguish a large fire. I figure they are only trying to slow it down enough for everyone to escape, after that they let her burn.

That makes sense - no point in risking lives once everyone is off the aircraft. There is still a risk of a fuel tank explosion.

The smoke/fumes are probably toxic as well.

Hopefully the final report will provide clarity.

Perhaps they conserve foam/water in case there is another separate accident. If they get low enough on firefighting capability, airport restrictions can come into effect depending on the firefighting category.

[goldeneagle]

Perhaps they conserve foam/water in case there is another separate accident. If they get low enough on firefighting capability, airport restrictions can come into effect depending on the firefighting category.

If they are fighting a fire on the runway, airport is already closed so that wont matter.

[pelmet]

Perhaps they conserve foam/water in case there is another separate accident. If they get low enough on firefighting capability, airport restrictions can come into effect depending on the firefighting category.

If they are fighting a fire on the runway, airport is already closed so that wont matter.

True, but I don't know how long it takes to get back up to proper levels of foam. The airport would likely open as soon as possible(such as the next day). It would be interesting to hear from an airport firefighter about replenishment times for firefighting capability or what the policy is for firefighting when the aircraft has been completely evacuated.

In addition, the airport could continue to allow aircraft to taxi to the gate or be towed. Accidents do happen with ground ops such as the recent fire on an AC 777 in Montreal with a baggage loader and ground collisions. It might look rather silly if the whole terminal burnt down or a cargo area building because all foam was discharged. In other words, a closed airport is not an airport without activity where a fire could happen.

Fire while taxiing:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... /74808356/

Fire while loading:
https://www.paddleyourownkanoo.com/2023 ... in-flames/

Fire while refueling:
https://twitter.com/OnDisasters/status/ ... 0150135808

APU fire:
https://reports.aviation-safety.net/201 ... UR-CAG.pdf

Fire in the Terminal:
https://www.google.ca/search?q=airport+ ... dy6hxP9iAM