Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by jeffbee on Saturday November 19, 2022 @12:40PM
(#33672454)
The event in the article is pretty clearly a breakdown of already-known safety practices, so anything that gets learned is being re-learned. Ground vehicles are never to enter aircraft movement areas without tower clearance. In this case either the rescue vehicles did not have clearance or the tower cleared them improperly.
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by jeffbee on Saturday November 19, 2022 @03:28PM
(#33674310)
Based on the charts and the video, I don't think these rescue trucks needed to cross a taxiway before crossing the runway. I listened to the recordings on liveatc and nothing jumps out. In the interests of open mindedness I should consider that it's not impossible that the ground vehicles had clearance and the aircraft did not. But it would be pretty shocking for a commercial air crew to take off without clearance.
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by sokoloff on Saturday November 19, 2022 @05:07PM
(#33675297)
Do you have a URL for a current chart? The old, single runway config would require proceeding on taxiway A to get to 34. The latest chart I could find online was 2019/2020, but there’s no way to get to the runway without transiting a taxiway on that side.
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by jeffbee on Sunday November 20, 2022 @12:26PM
(#33683049)
That's the same chart I googled up. Judging from a quite recent press release it seems like the project is years behind schedule and the taxiway is at best inactive and it looks to me like it doesn't really exist yet, still under construction. Aerial imagery from this year on Google Maps shows it as bare dirt. This image[1] from the October 22 press release seems to show the new taxiway as under construction.
The final thing is the video from the passenger on TikTok shows the rescue truck kicking up a cloud of dust, making it seem like they were crossing bare earth.
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by toast0 on Saturday November 19, 2022 @12:23PM
(#33672228)
Being more important doesn't change the laws of physics. Trains always have the right of way, then large boats, then aircraft, vehicles with flashy lights come after that.
From what I've seen around me, firefighters tend to be pretty careful drivers even when running with flashy lights, but there was an unfortunate break down here. Condolences to those involved.
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by Xylakant on Saturday November 19, 2022 @12:42PM
(#33672483)
I’m fairly certain that large boats win over trains. Their stopping distances are measured in kilometers, there no such thing as an emergency brake on water (except throwing your anchor, but that doesn’t help much in most cases either)
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by toast0 on Saturday November 19, 2022 @01:02PM
(#33672743)
Freight trains have stopping distances measured in kilometers too. Even with lots of brakes. Passenger trains can stop shorter, but not that much. Light rail, subways, and some commuter rail is a lot less massive and can stop relatively quickly of course.
But, large boats can turn if the channel allows and trains can't, and boating tradition is clear that vessels restrictred in their maneuverability have priority, so trains win. ;p
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by efitz on Saturday November 19, 2022 @01:05PM
(#33672788)
L. Ron Hubbard’s ship, the Apollo, was struck by a train while in port. The train derailed/jumped the track, plowed through a concrete barrier and impacted the ship.
Now arguably this was not a right-of-way situation; but I guess you could argue that stationary objects have right-of-way over vehicles.
There are roughly four airports with railways crossing the runway, although three of them seem out of use.
(I'd guess the train takes priority in normal use, as the schedule is probably less flexible, but given notice of an emergency the train could be asked to stop.)
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by cozzyd on Sunday November 20, 2022 @02:15AM
(#33679009)
you're kidding, but at the South Pole, you have to cross a skiway when walking from station to some of the experiment buildings. (There is a flashing beacon during airplane operations, but still, it's better to look...)
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by jvm___ on Saturday November 19, 2022 @04:29PM
(#33674944)
There was a security camera video, the firetruck and the plane were both in motion, the plane was almost at takeoff speed and the firetruck was driving and drove into the path of the wing of the plane. The truck was only a wing length away from driving into the path of the body of the aircraft.
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by hn_throwaway_99 on Saturday November 19, 2022 @09:45PM
(#33677603)
Yes, I saw the video, but obviously the fire truck never should have been on a live runway. Even if there weren't a catastrophic collision, these kinds of incursions of vehicles onto a live runway would be considered a major issue and result in serious safety reviews, etc. to determine what went wrong - again, even if there were no collision whatsoever.
> An ATC report states in writing that the rescue vehicle entered runway 16 from the west at the height of taxiway B without authorization and collided with flight LA-2213.
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by rdtsc on Saturday November 19, 2022 @11:54AM
(#33671839)
Using the Brave browser and I didn't see a single add. Looked like a simple forum page from the early 2000s to me. I see that Brave blocked about 8 adds so that's probably what you saw.
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by dang on Saturday November 19, 2022 @04:02PM
(#33674636)
That of course is extremely annoying, but:
"Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—things like article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting."
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by this_steve_j on Saturday November 19, 2022 @01:23PM
(#33673021)
This accident is reminiscent of Singapore airlines Flight 006. The 747-412 took off on an inactive runway during a typhoon and crashed into a vehicle, killing 83 of 179 onboard.
An initial investigation placed blame heavily on the flight crew, but other factors emerged in later reports.
There was construction equipment on an adjacent parallel closed runway. Along with the taxiway, it was fully illuminated with no barriers. The signs and markings were deficient and not readable in a typhoon at night.
The 747 was cleared for takeoff and crashed into a parked vehicle they could not see until V1.
When the final 30 minutes are played backward from mass casualties, the aircrew appears criminally negligent. But a 2 year investigation revealed an incredibly subtle drift into failure of the safety envelope.
A lack of ground radar, schedule pressure, and split second decisions contributed to a near certainty of tragedy at the sharp end.
Unlike with road deaths, these tragedies lead to safety improvements all over the world. We will all be a little safer because the victims paid with their lives.
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by gus_massa on Saturday November 19, 2022 @08:24PM
(#33677080)
I'm not sure why this was downvoted. The Mentour Pilot channel has a dozen of videos about old accidents, and he explains very well the causes with an extra insight because he is a pilot.
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by Graziano_M on Saturday November 19, 2022 @02:07PM
(#33673471)
I was in the air in-bound to Lima when this happened. I guess LIM only has one runway, and it's closed down until at least tomorrow, so that's about 36 hours of that whole airport being closed. Lots of cascading delays. Hoping I can get in tomorrow.
Re:Latam Airlines Airbus A320neo hits fire engine on runway ...
by rodcodes on Saturday November 19, 2022 @05:55PM
(#33675782)
As an Air Traffic Controller that worked in a third world country, I would be concerned around the two glaring holes.
1. Did the emergency services vehicles not know what Runway is in use and check out the left as they approached. They would've clearly seen the massive aircraft on short finals.
2. The Air Traffic Controller is responsible for the safe separation and operation of aircraft on the manoeuvring area, except for the ramp.
But it seems that both the ATC, the pilots in the aircraft and the driver themselves. During busy non-standard Ops - I would keep as much distance between them as possible to ensure
It's a 15+ ton vehicle - it doesn't just jump out in front of you.
This works due to regulation, training, and an honest evaluation of every incident that forces changes in the system.
> The flight carried 102 passengers, 36 of them got injured of which 4 seriously injured.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_MAX#Grounding_and_r...
Two people died.
“Tower” is in charge of the runways and “ground” in charge of the taxiways. Both are movement areas.
https://pe.ivao.aero/storage/download/cartas/1595026538_cart...
The final thing is the video from the passenger on TikTok shows the rescue truck kicking up a cloud of dust, making it seem like they were crossing bare earth.
1: https://static1.simpleflyingimages.com/wordpress/wp-content/...
From what I've seen around me, firefighters tend to be pretty careful drivers even when running with flashy lights, but there was an unfortunate break down here. Condolences to those involved.
But, large boats can turn if the channel allows and trains can't, and boating tradition is clear that vessels restrictred in their maneuverability have priority, so trains win. ;p
Now arguably this was not a right-of-way situation; but I guess you could argue that stationary objects have right-of-way over vehicles.
There are roughly four airports with railways crossing the runway, although three of them seem out of use.
(I'd guess the train takes priority in normal use, as the schedule is probably less flexible, but given notice of an emergency the train could be asked to stop.)
https://spiritsofansett.com/history/train.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7B8LEjK6UN4
-A320 Captain
More detail
> An ATC report states in writing that the rescue vehicle entered runway 16 from the west at the height of taxiway B without authorization and collided with flight LA-2213.
"Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—things like article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting."
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
An initial investigation placed blame heavily on the flight crew, but other factors emerged in later reports.
There was construction equipment on an adjacent parallel closed runway. Along with the taxiway, it was fully illuminated with no barriers. The signs and markings were deficient and not readable in a typhoon at night.
The 747 was cleared for takeoff and crashed into a parked vehicle they could not see until V1.
When the final 30 minutes are played backward from mass casualties, the aircrew appears criminally negligent. But a 2 year investigation revealed an incredibly subtle drift into failure of the safety envelope.
A lack of ground radar, schedule pressure, and split second decisions contributed to a near certainty of tragedy at the sharp end.
Unlike with road deaths, these tragedies lead to safety improvements all over the world. We will all be a little safer because the victims paid with their lives.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore_Airlines_Flight_006
1. Did the emergency services vehicles not know what Runway is in use and check out the left as they approached. They would've clearly seen the massive aircraft on short finals.
2. The Air Traffic Controller is responsible for the safe separation and operation of aircraft on the manoeuvring area, except for the ramp.
But it seems that both the ATC, the pilots in the aircraft and the driver themselves. During busy non-standard Ops - I would keep as much distance between them as possible to ensure
It's a 15+ ton vehicle - it doesn't just jump out in front of you.
https://aeropeep.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/3.jpg