Haneda Accident | AIRPORT ANIMATION + RAW AUDIO + TRANSCRIPT
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 ก.ย. 2024
- New Update on the Tokyo Haneda accident.
After the incredible amount of comments in the previous 2 videos, I have edited a VASAviation style video incuding the airport animation now that the aircraft positions are a bit more clarified after 3 days since the accident. Hope this throws light to some doubts that I have read amongst thousands of comments. Anyway, the investigation is ongoing and more information will be officially released.
VASAviation will be following the investigation very closely and will update the video descriptions, pinned comments or making new videos if considered necessary for the audience.
The point of any aviation investigation is to avoid future similar incidents or accidents so does this channel as well sharing the procedure and the results. Thank you.
____________________
Your support is really important and appreciated to keep these videos coming! =)
-- / vasaviation
-- paypal.me/VASA...
Become a VIP member of VASAviation! -- / @vasaviation
Join VASAviation's Discord -- / discord
Twitter/Facebook/Instagram -- @VASAviation
Audio source: www.liveatc.net/
New Update on the Tokyo Haneda accident.
After the incredible amount of comments in the previous 2 videos, I have edited a VASAviation style video incuding the airport animation now that the aircraft positions are a bit more clarified after 3 days since the accident. Hope this throws light to some doubts that I have read amongst thousands of comments. Anyway, the investigation is ongoing and more information will be officially released.
A new information released that an airport NOTAM reported the STOP BAR for runway 34R on Intersection C5 was out of service.
VASAviation will be following the investigation very closely and will update the video descriptions, pinned comments or making new videos if considered necessary for the audience.
The point of any aviation investigation is to avoid future similar incidents or accidents so does this channel as well sharing the procedure and the results. Thank you.
I read that as well but you can hear the tower give the instruction and it was read back as well. Hold at C5, not enter the runway and cleared to take off. that's the real issue. I feel so bad because the A350 probably couldn't even see the other plane on the runway. Probably just looked like any other lights until smoosh and saw the fireball is when they found out.
As far as I know the stop bar is only used at low visibility. Since it was a clear weather with 30km of visibility, the stop bar wouldn't be activated anyway. It maybe could have prevented the accident though.
The official AIP of Tokyo Haneda Airport says:
"Stop Bar Operations:
1. Stop Bar Lights will be operated when the visibility of the lowest RVR of the RWY16L/34R is at or less than 600m.
2. Stop Bar Lights on TWY C1, C2, C13 and C14 are controlled individually by ATC.
3. Stop Bar Lights on TWY C3 THRU C12 are not controlled individually by ATC.
4. During the period of Stop Bar Lights operated, TWY C3 THRU C12 are not available for depature aircraft."
@@commandosolo_Danny_Secary But note there was no 'hold short of Runway' message. If the crew were not familiar since they heard 'number 1' they may have assumed the instruction was 'taxi into position and hold' which is NOT clearance for takeoff and holding is what they were doing. This will likely come down to some controller blame as well. The audio of the controller instruction was not very good at all.
@@jameshisself9324 from what others say, "hold short" isn't used in Japan. Arguably it is implicit as you shouldn't taxi beyond your cleared point. In countries that use it, it is to reinforce the point.
The Captain & Dash-8 aircraft were based at this airport so he should have been very familiar with their patterns and layout. "Number 1" feels odd to me as only arrivals get a number like this in the UK but as this was normal practice here, it wouldn't have made the captain think he could taxi onto the runway.
Elsewhere reported that the incursion monitoring system was working and was flashing at the controller but the controller wasn't looking at it.
@@petertweed83 No they only reported that the system was working and that there **might** have been an alert that was missed by the controller. They didn't confirm an actual alert.
As a former Flight Attendant for TWA 50 years ago somebody has to say kudos to the Cabin Crew. NO PASSENGER DEATHS WITH 300+ ON BOARD. Despite fire all around this crew did heroic work. Way to Go!!!
So true! …they had to react to a huge fire without any warning or preparation with 3 doors/slides only.
I believe a huge amount of that is to do with Japanese culture. Organised, efficient and honest. Lots of reports of leaving belongings behind etc
From what I understand only three of the eight emeregency exits were functioning proplery. Yet they managed to evacuate everyone safely in only eighteen minutes. Were I the CEO of JAL, everyone of those crew members would be getting a six figure bonus.
Read an article on Joe the carbon fiber airframe helped those people get off that burning plane. KUDOS to everyone involved in t the aftermath.
I'll be very interested to find out what the coastguard pilot and co-pilot's workload had been in the preceding hours and days.
very interesting ... this makes the point !
Yes, would definitely be interesting. The thought of them being overworked due to the recent earthquake & tsunami came to mind immediately.
Reported elsewhere that the captain flew an 8 hour sortie the day before in this aircraft on fisheries protection, and wasn't originally rostered for the accident day (then the earthquake hit)
Seems like the crew was flying 2 round trips to Niigata to deliver disaster relief goods just about 24hours before the accident
This flight for the JCG Dash 8 was their 3rd mission of the day according to other reports.
It is incredibly sad to know these people are the ones who were going to help out those affected by the earthquake. My deep condolences.
They weren't going to help with the earthquake.
No one realises how long Japan is, they would most likely be helping out in areas around Toukyo, Chiba, Yokohama, Shizuoka, Aichi.
It not that place is to far to fly to but flying there were flying around doing search and rescue is a big toll on the workers.
Also if something bad happens on the east side of Japan then you would have less resources on the east side.
@@narsplace They had aid supplies onboard, clown.
The aircraft is also the only aircraft that survived the 311 tsunami in Sendai international airport
@@lhk7006I also heard that, and it had been repaired after… very auspicious 😮
@@narsplaceIts been reported im the local media that the plane was going to Niigate - a prefecture thats quite near to Ishikawa.
For the A350 to have possibly ran over the C8 and still remain relatively intact is truly a testament to the engineering and size comparison I think.
It would be a different story if the Japan Airlines is a smaller plane... like another C8...
Physics says F=Ma... the smaller the M... the higher the acceleration... and acceleration is what kills people and breaks things...
It's simple physics.
true. even the massive boeing 747(singapore flight 006) split into several pieces after it collided with construction vehicle. its amazing this plane remained intact after crashing into another plane around 1/3 of its size
I think the nose gear being off the ground saved a lot of the impact on the A350.
@@mi___If I recall correctly, there wasn't just one construction vehicle but several heavy vehicles like cranes, bulldozers and rollers. Compared to a small aircraft that is a lot of mass to crash into.
according to japanese news:
1) coast guard plane had no clearance to enter runway. this was also read back by JCG pilots
2) Haneda has a runway incursion detection system in the tower. if a airplane enters a runway the runway on the screen turns yellow. the controller in the tower seems to have missed that warning
3) Stop bar lights are not used during good visibility at Haneda. Now you can discuss if night /darkness counts as low/bad visibility or not. but NOTAM states that they where out of service. so the pilot should have known and take special attention.
4) the Coast guard pilot in his newest statement says he is sure that he got clearance to enter and was just starting to accelerate and take off when they got hit
seems like the holes in the swiss cheese start to lineup....
Lastly, why a350 couldn't see and avoid the traffic on the rwy..😢
@@user-ts9xe2xd3p many experts and pilots seem to be agreeing that a small plane lined up on the centerline of the runway is very hard or impossible to see at night because of the surrounding lights of the runway. Nothing much the a350 could have done
@@user-ts9xe2xd3p Landing in the dark and large airplanes do not have windows below the cockpit, so probably didn't see anything until it was too late.
@Chris-iu7in yeah, I see. I'm sorry about that
@@LastMSThis was exactly the case with a runway collision in Los Angeles back in the 90s. A USAir 737 was cleared to land with a Metroliner holding on the runway at night. Investigators cleared the 737 pilots of any wrongdoing because the Metroliner’s lighting would have been near impossible to see among the runway lighting
Coast guard’s plane was cleared to hold 34R at C5, as #1 priority to enter runway,, he was never cleared to enter the runway… sad they even read back the whole instructions, even saying hold at C5…. Absolutely avoidable accident, may his crew RIP!!
situational awareness problem.
@@amorporchile2958 More like expectation bias.
For some reason and it's been happening a lot.
When they're told to line up and wait or hold, some pilots just expect they're cleared for take off. Also because it happens to often.
The airport hold lights that normally light up red were also inoperable at the time.
The only hope that they had was for the A350 to go around which they could not.
There was about 8-10 seconds after the JAL was cleared to land and JCG made the first radio call. Question is did they hear that transmission? Finding the CVR on JCG is paramount.
@@trilight3597yea but I can imagine the pilots of the A350 not seeing the small Dhc because of the cluster of lights. Do you know if the -8 was configured for take off? (lights)
@@thud9797it doesn't even matter if they heard it, because none of the transmissions indicate that the DHC was cleared to line up
RIP to the 5 who died, but it was really a miracle that this didn't turn worse.
I thought when i first first saw the video that likely they were caught on the burning plane.
the cabin crew of Japan air were the heroes of this story. also glad to see nobody was carrying luggage as they filed the aircraft
@@michaelroberts1064Not to mention the passengers themselves. Have you seen that other evacuation video where everyone's getting their stuff from the overhead bins? Appalling.
@@michaelroberts1064 I hate to say it, but if this happened in the US, I don't think we'd see the same.. Japan is a country of rule followers for the common good; the US, not so much. :(
@@Aloha_Alan Stop the racism, other airplane tragedies have happened in the U.S. and the passengers' attitudes were exemplary.
Its amazing anyone survived. I first thought the A350 had only clipped the C8 on its side but it hit it square on. The composite fuselage really held together and seemed to resist the fire better than aluminium.
Both A350 engines took a severe hit from the Dash-8 wings, so the aircraft were lined up almost perfectly.
Not only did the A350 take the hit incredibly well but the #2 engine was still running despite significant damage. The Trent XWB is also built very tough apparently...
based from the photos/videos circulation online, you could also see the A350’s nose being crumpled/destroyed before it burned down. im assuming that was hit by the Dash-8’s tail fin. i might be wrong though!
One sad detail seems to be that the coast guard plane MA722/Mizunagi was the only plane that survived the tsunami at Sendai Airport in 2011. So it was seen as somewhat of a symbol of resilience and reconstruction since then.
Ironic, so the accident plane was a yesterday's survivor - now today's casualty. 😞
So Death's dues were finally paid off in a way.
exactly, that circle had to be concluded.@@mfaizsyahmi
I've done quite a few night landings at an international airport (many years ago) and you can hardly see anything. You can't see other aircraft in the air, only their red and green wingtip lights. Between the lights, it's totally dark. An aircraft parked on a runway is not that easy to see either if you are coming from behind. The red and green lights are there, but they are pretty easily confused with the runway and taxi lights.
May the victims RIP and the surviving pilot help with the investigation. Really sad
Thank you. So many people questioning the A350 pilots thinking they should have easily seen the dash 8 on the runway. Air Canada 759 nearly had a similar fate back in 2017.
@@Dismay992I was just talking to my husband about that near miss in San Francisco. It was the same situation!
Usually the red and green nav lights are on fwd facing wing tip and white position lights facing aft so would be even harder to distinguish from above and behind not sure how the dash 8 lights are configured .
@@Dismay992I think it’s completely understandable that the A350 crew didn’t see the Dash-8. The profile and lighting of the smaller aircraft against the high intensity runway lights, at night, whilst also looking through the HUD. Extremely difficult to see. I fly the 787 and have operated into Haneda. It’s a particularly well run airfield, with excellent controllers. I can only imagine that in the same situation, it would be extreme luck that would prevent you from falling into the same situation.
I see your point. A (big) number of years ago I used to listen to the local APP/TWR (SBSV). One night the plane on short final asks the TWR "Sir, is that an aircraft on the runway?"
Immediately the TWR replies "GO AROUND!"
There was an incursion...
What is most impressive is the modern slides. They are able to withstand heat for so much longer.
Still amazed that everyone aboard the JAL A350-900 evacuated alive.
But why didi it take so long to evacuate. Very worrisome.
only 3 slides were used or something like that
very impressive indeed... perhaps most of the passengers are Japanese and they follow rules and order pretty well.....
@@colinpovey7923 Long? It was even shorter than is common. During training, it took more time for everyone to leave (80 seconds, IIRC). This didn't even take 50, and it's all because the passengers left their luggage on the plane and did what they were told.
Imagine if this was a Southwest flight and Shaniqua was holding up 150 passengers to die, all to try to get her fake LV bag from the overhead compartment. They got out quick cos they listened to directions and left all their shit to burn.
Thank you for these updates on this tragedy. I am horrified that, despite proper readback, the captain of the Coast Guard Dash-8 did not hold at C5 and, instead, proceeded onto the runway. My thoughts are with his deceased colleagues and those injured during the evacuation of the A350. I sincerely hope they are able to get the full story out of the Coast Guard captain.
As is always the case there are more than one cause to this situation. Were the runway incursion lights working (I think they were?) Did the ground conflict system not warn the controllers? Why didn't the A350 pilots see the dash 8 sitting on their runway?
As noted above, the STOP BAR at C5 was inoperative. NOTAM aside, PIC may have had no idea they had entered an active runway! I think there's an argument to be made about not sending aircraft to that intersection at night when the lights don't work! They should have been set up for a full-length takeoff, even if they didn't need the distance. Tower has some responsibility for this!
The captain that survived will have to live with this and presumably give more statements. Series of errors on the face of it. As for seeng the aircraft on the runway from the incoming plane , no chance. Too many things happening. All runways are dangerous places. Live ammunition literally. Some could be made safer as well.
@@xheralt Well, there's one hole of the swiss cheese
@@xheralt they're an earthquake relief supply mission, so priority. Was even given a number 1 sequence while another plane was already at C1.
Rip to the 5 cost guard members who passed away while serving their country and the victims affected by the earthquakes 🙏🏽🙏🏽
Before anyone comments, it’s now standard practice that once a seriously burning aircraft has been evacuated to just let it burn, as it’s futile to try to extinguish the flames and is very dangerous for the firefighters. This is especially true on landing aircraft with low fuel. They might approach an accident aircraft on takeoff roll differently, but only to stop aviation fuel from spreading too far.
Indeed. The aircraft is likely a total loss if it's seriously alight. If everyone is accounted for, then firefighter safety then becomes paramount.
And from the passengers of this flight we heard that crew members put them in easily countable groups close to the airplane, so they did a headcount very fast.
Yeah but we are in a "climate emergency" which threatens the planet, so they should put the fire out!
My guess is the pilot in the coast guard plane was experiencing "Expectation Bias" which is very common amongst us pilots during very stressful days of work...He might have just heard "line up and wait" and thought well, "I'm the first guy in here so he's probably talking about me" I just wished he'd have had someone beside him who was paying attention. very preventable but not uncommon
They even read the instructions back correctly to taxi to holding point C5, as number 1. That’s pretty clear they acknowledged to hold short of the runway. Somehow something went wrong at this point and they didn’t stop short. Did they misinterpreted the turn and somehow they thought they are at C5 but actual they are on the runway? Cuz people have been saying the Dash 8 didn’t seem to have landing and strobe lights on, which are a must when entering an active runway.
Expectation Bias coupled with "get-there-itis" had to be prevalent for the Dash 8 cockpit crew.
The hold short lights were out of service as well via a NOTAM. Very unfortunate...
@@ellisromero doesn't matter:
Stop Bar lights are generally only used if visibility is bad.
2) Stop Bar Lights will be operated when the visibility or the lowest RVR of the RWY16L/34R is at or less than 600m.
5) During the period Stop Bar Lights operated, TWY C3 THRU C12 are not available for departure aircraft.
which would mean no matter what, they cannot expect the Stop Bar Lights at all when departing from C5.
What do you mean someone beside him ? Isn’t that dash 8 certified for 2 pilots ?
From some pictures of the A350, I think the front wheel hasn’t touch down yet. The nose cone of 350 has the T that looks like it struck the high T tail of the dash 8 squarely. That means the belly of 350 was slightly raised at an angle. Once the T tail was taken out the belly of 350 just crushed down on the dash 8. Both engine cowlings of 350 have a straight cut indicating the engines took out the wings of dash 8, (or push them). 350 kind of belly flopped at an angle onto the dash 8.
I believe you are correct. With the T tail and the high wings of the Dash 8 as well as location on the runway and the video, the only explanation is that the A350 nose had not yet touched down.
Yep I think this is exactly what has happend. And I would say this is one of the main contributing factors it didn`t turn even worse, especially regarding the A350 and its crew & pax. If you compare the height of the t-tail of an DHC-8 300 to the height of the cockpit of an A350 on ground you find the following: DHC-8 300 at the top of the t-tail 7.49 meters and A350 cockpit somewhere between 6 an 7 meters. Assuming the A350 had been completely on ground with the nose wheel, the cockpit would have been smashed by the t-tail of the DHC-8 300 with uncertain but certainly worse outcome. As the radom of the A350 hit the t-tail of the DHC-8 300 we can assume the main gear touched down, while the nose wheel was approximately 2.5 to 3.5 meters away from the ground (t-tail of DHC-8 300 at 7.49 meters and radom of A350 at 4 to 5 meters from ground) and the whole plane was still remaining in the angle of attack during flaring starting to lower the nose...
How about the starboard engine instead? The magnified video looks to show the Airbus's nose passing the right hand side of the Dash Fuselage before the fireball.
@@scollyutube The damage to the radome of the A350 indicates that the T-tail of the DHC-8 was hit very directly straight on right underneath the A350's cockpit. The port landing lights of the A350 make it appear as if the DHC-8 was hit slightly to the right. Nevertheless, both engines of the A350 hit the wings of the DHC-8, as can be seen from the damage to the internal engine cowlings on both sides. From this and the position of the wreckage of the DHC-8 quite lying straight in direction of the centreline, it can be assumed that the A350 hit the DHC-8 directly from behind and at a slight angle of attack.
From the wreckage of the Dash 8, it looked like a furrow had been ploughed right along the fuselage, maybe by the A350 nose gear. To me, it looked like the A350 nose was low right after the impact, not just when it ran off the runway.
I have tremendous gratefulness for the channel and the hard work done on this video, and many, many prior times. I would suggest a tweak to the tantalizing color coding used here with multiple aircraft. Starting at 0:50 I was confused trying to match crafts with colors and captions. Possible improvements: every 722 transmission in pink, BOTH incoming and outgoing; every primary approach craft's in blue; and so forth. Or, simpler, or in addition, a small 722 symbol, 516 symbol, 166 symbol.
Gratuitous comment for Victor's channel stats at VASAviation. Remarkable animation as usual.
Thank you for putting this together and sharing it with other creators for discussion and review! I really appreciate your efforts :)
It's sad that nobody spotted the error. My heart breaks for the lost crewmen. Prayers from the US.
Не нужны ваши мольбы из США..Вы как помолитесь, так от них сразу куча проблем в других странах!! Лучше за деда Джо помолись,чтобы он не помер до выборов!!🤣🍥🤣
@@alexbrands11You sounds so disrespectful, ngl. We're talking about plane collision, not politics.
@@alexbrands11 Another russian revealing his rotten character.
@@Flexximilian they all are.
It's rather odd it even happened at all with todays modern tech. I thought there were already systems in place to monitor for runway incursions but clearly not... I'd bet anyone $5m that they'll be in place at every major airport withing the next 5 years after this.
Airbus A350’s advanced engineering and innovative design reflects a commitment to incredible performance and safety. The composite fuselage integrity performed remarkably.
Well done Airbus!
Condolences to all involved... terrible tragedy to be a victim rushing to help other victims... this earthquake has taken a heavy toll...🇺🇸🇺🇸🇯🇵🇯🇵
🙏🏽
US nuked JP and caused more kills than in holocaust, poisoned rice lands in Vietnam and now you are coming forward and telling condolences to those 5 ulucky @davehue9517
This incident is remarkably similar to something that happened at LAX on Feb 1, 1991. A Skywest Fairchild Metroliner was cleared onto the runway and to some extent forgotten about. Meanwhile an USAir B737-300 was cleared to land on the same runway. The Metroliner did not have its strobes on and was lost in the runway lighting. The 737 crashed into the Metroliner. All 12 on the Metroliner and 23 aboard the 737 were lost. Watch "Mayday" episode Cleared for Disaster.
That incident sprang to mind immediately I heard about this one 😢
Finally a detailed report
Thank you
Sure - need clicks
Thank you VASA for uploading high quality content, hopefully will not happen those accidents again
0:59 Clear order to LA722A "taxi to holding C5", meaning to STOP at C5. The JA722A repeated the order correctly. Waiting for an answer to the question: 43 sec and no one saw the plane waiting on 34R.
34R not 43R .. see how easy mistakes happen:o)
@@suzieb8366 Copy!!! Thank you.
In the dark it would have been very hard to tell if the Dash 8 was on the runway or holding next to it. Plus, ATC is so busy monitoring other traffic, they have to trust the aircraft was where it was instructed to be. I'd like to think that in the daylight an accident like this wouldn't happen because someone in the tower would have been able to clearly see the Dash 8 on the runway and called for the A350 to go around.
I’m asking the same question too. I’m getting answers from people who think it’s ok for pilots to make seemingly egregious mistakes on both ends. Yes mistakes happens ….but 43 seconds and the approaching aircraft saw nothing ? Tower saw nothing? Let’s all cease all night time operations then since night time is an ok excuse for shit to happen.
@@gusmc01 I agree. The tower is the "General" and ALL the pilots are the "Soldiers" to obey.
Can't imagine what it looked like for JAL166 before and during the go around....
Accidents that cost lives are always sad.
But it seems to sting a little worse when it involves people that were engaged in rescue/relief operations for the Earthquake victims.
1:00 into it they actually read back to taxi to hold point C5. damn, that was 100% the pilots fault. they were told to taxi to holding point C5, they read it back and then go onto the active runway just because. sad sad sad
I wonder why the controller did not add "hold short runway 34R".
@@dhahm6884 Many airports give clearances like this - it's a HOLDING point after all.
@@dhahm6884
They do not do this in Japan and other places but I suspect after this accident they will revisit that policy.
Read the pinned comment at the top - the C5 hold line lights may have been out of service. They could have taxied past it, but what's unfathomable is how they could have sat on the runway for 43 seconds - they must have known they were on the runway.
It'll be interesting to find out what their workload had been in the hours and days before the crash.
@@gordon1545they knew that they were on the runway, the captain from the coast guard plane said that he got the permission to takeoff
Thank you for your animation.
Thank you for showing the C5 location in the animation.
Yesterday, I have already posted in some blogs about the (A) and (B) below.
(A) the coastal guard plane's pilot did not see the C5 sign.
(B) in an international airport, the coastal guard plane's pilot does not have excellent communication ability in English. In Japan, Coast Guard is to protect the coastline. That means the personnels are navally or militarily trained. Of course, Japan navy and military are trained mainly in Japanese. They use Japanese in their communication mainly. For example, China's airforce/army people communicate in Chinese. Russia's army talks in Russian in their practices. Because of the above, the pilot of JA722A (coast guard plane) did not have good understanding of the instructions from the controlling tower's officials.
Right now, the possibility of the Coast Guard pilot didn't see the C5 sign still holds.
By the animation and and the diagram of the animation by VASAviation here, how can a pilot approaching that way knows that around 100 meters more of rolling the plane before left turning to reach C5 holding point?
As for the passenger plane, JAL 516, it is possible that the 3 pilots could not notice the stationary Coast Guard plane. It is because that there are 5 lines of lights at the landing spot of the runway. These lights may confuse with the Coast Guard plane’s rear lights.
The saying of 5 lines of lights at the spot of plane landing of the runny way of Haneda Airport can be verified by watching the video using the link below.
th-cam.com/video/lbmHIwNSoi8/w-d-xo.html
Clearly in the video, from 5:54 to around 6:55, there are 5 lines of light. Then, there are only 3 lines of light after that.
Are there ground radars at the airport? Still, the officials at the controlling tower may not notice a plane (the Coast Guard plane) has entered the runway in a short time of 40 seconds as they are busy all the time.
Furthermore, regarding the leaving of the main pilot of the JAL 516, reportedly he was the last person leaving the plane 18 minutes after the 2 planes crashed. Eighteen minutes period is rather long. So, would VASAviation compose a timeline as to when the first door and slide deployed etc after the crash? Thank!
This video gave more context to what happened. As JAL166 was on app behind JAL516, and the TWR said “continue the app, we have a DEP” and also gave JAA722A the information that he was “number 1” could have the subliminar idea that he was cleared…. As every accident is a sum of factors, there are allways lessons
Right, 516 lands, the dash departs, and 166 lands behind him
Not clear why the dash pilots got confused…. that will be the focus of the investigation…
but professional pilots don’t operate on assumptions, they strictly follow the controllers instructions…. You’re not cleared unless the controller says you’re cleared…
@@jaysmith1408
But in his mind the JCG captain knowing he is #1 meant to him I'm #1 for takeoff so I am pulling onto the runway in preparation for takeoff oblivious to any other aircraft. It sounds unbelievable but lines up with what he believed. That's why I can't wait to see the CVR transcript to know if they were on the frequency when the tower cleared and JAL516 acknowledged their clearance to land about a minute and a half after the JCG pulled onto the runway.
Yes, it does sound like language confusion. Possibly something with Japanese not being an 'international' language for aviation.
@@weldonyoung1013 I’m fond of the Canadian system, English is almost always spoken, if both controller and crew speak French, they use French. Some say it can lead to lower situational awareness amongst other English crews, but like in this case, where both controllers and crews are speaking English (fairly broken and heavily accented) I think it would have been advantageous to use Japanese. The only English crew on the air was Delta, and his operations were fairly irrelevant to the matter at hand.
I was working a security detail, and the supervisor was Haitian. After multiple attempts to relay a message in English, I switched to French, and he picked up on the first try.
You can really see that "Swiss Cheese" accident model here... So many holes that line up. Nobody involved was speaking their first language. A taxi instruction was misunderstood. A runway incursion happened. The controllers, tower and ground, both missed it. The landing pilots didn't see it and missed/misinterpreted any automated warnings they got.
There will be more holes in between, but let's do what the aviation community does, what got aviation to be the safest form of transportation: Mourn, but also learn the lessons, because carrying those lessons forward is the best way to honor the memory of those lost.
The Dash 8 is a pretty large aircraft. Amazing that the A350 didn't sustain more damage or go in to some sort of roll. Miracle. RIP to the 5 who died.
I think 350 nose wheel was not down yet. The nose cone has a cut from the T tail. 350 kind of belly flopped onto dash 8 at an angle.
except the piot
@@THYB737 I said pretty large not huge. (I see you've changed your comment). And if you think an aircraft that can hold up to 80 people including pilots, with a wingspan up to 93' and up to 100' long, is small, then you live in a dream world.
@@wisanu99 Interesting if that is the case. The video does look like it's fully landed, but who knows.
@@wisanu99 The nose wheel is definitely down. If it wasn't down, the pilots would notice and go around.
Τhe most likely scenario is that the sole survivor of the Dash 8, its Captain, made the fatar mistake to enter the runway, based on his expectation bias....
That's sad to hear, he's going to have a lot of guilt riding on him from now on.
@didyuknowI believe someone quoted him as saying he thought he had been cleared onto the runway. Even though the read back (from the co-pilot) says hold short.
@didyuknow Well, fatigue is again a factor. There are comments claiming their whole team wasn't supposed to be working that day but had to be called up due to the earthquake. No amount of training is going to help when the brain is tired.
@BuffaloWarrior7 I don't understand this he is told to line up and wait and repeats back line up and wait and continues lining up with the runway and waiting for clearance,
@mourantell the co pilot is doing coms the pilot is taxiing. So it wasn't the "same person" it was the same crew.
Lots of talk about the stop bars. As mentioned in another comment, and as per AIP Japan, stop bars at Haneda only used in certain vis/RVR conditions. Also as per AIP, when weather conditions are such that stop bars are in use, departures from C3 to C12 (these stop bars are not controlled by the tower) are not available. But let’s not forget that stop bars are not the only holding point lighting. AIP states runway holding position lights and runway guard lights. There is a comment that the guard lights turn on in the daytime regardless of weather conditions, and no mention of night time operations. So perhaps these are off for HN operations. In any case, there are at least holding position lights operative at night.
1:50 omg you can hear JAL166 pilot holding back tears relaying that message, the view from their POV must have been insane.
DAL276 mentioned in the ATC transcript releaeed two days ago (which is missing from this reconstruction) were approaching or already holding at C1 when the collision occurred. They likely had a very good view point on how this unfolded and the crew's testimony could be valuable.
Thanks for this video.
After the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011, we could only obtain information about where the radiation leaked from the nuclear power plant was spreading from foreign reports.
The situation is exactly the same this time.
The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, which has jurisdiction over Haneda Airport, seems to want to pull the curtain back on the incident with little investigation, claiming that the captain of the Japan Coast Guard made an error in judgment.
It is rare to see the information we see and hear here on Japanese TV.
It is shameful as a Japanese person.
Maybe this is a dumb question, but does Haneda not have a Ground Radar? How could the tower not notice that JA722A was on the runway for 43 seconds?
FIrst the stop bar light is broken... senond no ADSB onboard .... ATC says that they do not watch the rader all the time because it is so busy...
JA772A Didn't have an Active ADSB Transponder.
I think what you mean is a runway incursion avoidance system. Which automatically goes off as soon as anything larger than a small animal enters the runway.
@@kagenkei8888 ADS-B data is not used for ground control SMR radar. It’s latency is too large, can be over a minute. So not a factor.
Yes HND do have an SMR. A commenter above quoted that the radar was working, and indicating the possible conflict (color change on screen), but the controller said he/she was busy with something else and not monitoring it.
Those pilots remained unbelievably calm.
Props to them
Five Specialist and the pilot who was severely injured were all very skilled and very ✖️permanent ◎ Prominent Who were of highest integrity I hear. Rest in peace and may the left families and loved ones Take it well, and receive enough Honor and condolences money.
That is a long time idling on the runway for either the tower or the landing aircraft not to notice the error
As a pilot I can tell you seeing a small aircraft from behind on the runway at night is very, very difficult. It's a few small lights in a huge bright environment full of sparkles everywhere
@@VASAviation I can appreciate that. I would then guess the tower would have the same struggles
That was my thought, too. 43 seconds is a long time. Since I don't have aviation experience, do you have any idea how long into or if it was even possible at that point in the landing sequence for a go-around to be sounded?
@@cheapercharlieiiithey don't. Haneda has a SMR. According to avherald: "On Jan 5th 2024 the Ministry of Transport reported that the tower controller in charge stated in an interview, that after giving the taxi instructions to the DH8C he turned his attention towards other aircraft and did not notice the DH8C had taxied onto the runway. The runway monitoring system has been working properly. The DH8C stopped on the runway for about 40 seconds, it is possible that the controller missed the alert display, there is no rule requiring the controller to stare onto the screen all times, the screen would turn red and runway be flashing yellow (operative on all runways since 2011)."
@@pondscummagnetfishingan airplane like the A350 would need a couple of seconds to spool their engines up from idle to take off/go around power. It is likely that if the instruction to go around would be given 10-15s before the collision time, the accident could be avoided.
However as people have pointed out, seeing another aircraft on the runway, at night time, in the final landing moments is a challenge.
The landing aircraft likely had poor visibility, especially in the final moments where the aircraft would flare/pitch upwards prior to touchdown.
ATC could have better visibility, but operations, workload, and attention is very tense.
People can be quick to assign fault for accidents, however it is important when analyzing aviation accidents to address all possible factors and involving systems to see how they interact with each other and how they can lead to accidents. Traditional methods like swiss cheese only take you so far
That ATC comment "we have a departure" may have confused the coast guard pilot (thinking he was the departure)
I understand the stop bar lights were inoperable on these taxiways. Considering that the Dash 8 just sat on the runway for over 40 seconds, I wonder if they confused the C taxi lanes and thought they were on the C 5B which is just to the left, curves and is a bit longer. They may have thought they were holding short.
there is no taxiway C5B anymore. taxiways get build and renamed all the time, charts updated. u probably looked at an older chart. last time haneda got updated was 2022 which didn't include C5B anymore, alls the entrances to Runway 34R are C1-C14. No extra letters anymore.
@@DarkPenguin24 You're right. It looks like the chart I was looking at was from 2019.
@@Vegan_Tree Also, the lights that indicate where the stop bars are were all perfectly functional. The only lights inop were the stop bar lights that are not used at Haneda if there is better than 600m visibility. If they have to turn on the stop bar lights C3 through C12 are closed and cannot be used to enter the runway.
@@MichaelOnines So much for my theory. Thank you for the information though. It's a sad set of events.
Love your channel. Can’t even watch b/c my hair stands on end. What I wouldn’t give to be a materials scientist right now.
Until we get the cockpit voice recording from the coastguard plane, it's difficult to make any guesses.
In a scenario such as this, there's not generally a single failure, there are several.
And with accidents in asia, power distance often plays a role. I wonder if any of the crew on the dash 8 knew the pilot had disobeyed the tower.
Just imagine what would have happened if the coast guard plane was 100m further on the runway.
Same thing i guess, just from the front
Probably much worse outcome, considering the A350 would've struck the Dash 8 on full TOGA (I reckon the JAL pilots would've tried to go-around once they saw the Dash, but I guess at the point anything is too late), and end up similar to the KLM flight on Tenerife.
@@nakqalzakiit would take multiple seconds to go full toga
Why is there no actual audio for the taxi instructions to the Dash 8? Transcript only is weird considering they captured the other audio.
Because liveatc recordings come from 3rd party radio receivers that are not at airports. They don't receive transmissions as clearly as they would if they the liveact antenna were at the airport.
Transmissions from aircraft that are in flight are clearly because they have better line of sight to the volunteers antenna. Transmissions from larger aircraft are clearer because they have more powerful radios.
The dash 8 is a smaller aircraft with a less powerful radio which is on the ground.
The antenna that records transmissions for liveatc is simply not close enough to the airport to get clear transmissions from such an aircraft.
@@magical_catgirl it should have at least got ground frequency talking to the Dash 8
@@Squawk737yt they got taxi instructions to holding point C5 when they were on Taxiway C. And they read that clearance back.
@@DarkPenguin24 yes according to the transcript, but there hasn't been any actual audio of this. Tower and ground was being recorded, as well as other aircraft on the ground. Why can't we hear the exchange between the controller and the Dash 8?
@@Squawk737yt audio is available on liveatc but in pretty poor quality.
It seems to me that the Dash 8 pilot thought that the Tower was talking to a departing flight instead of one approaching and went out onto the runway expecting to to the next departure.
I'm an old Boatswains Mate and am familiar with Radio Chatter at Sea so I may be on to something here .
Somebody got lost in the jumble of words . And I also DIDN'T hear more instructions from Ground Control .
The main reason for the use of AM and NOT FM is that FM has the capture effect. If someone is already talking on FM, the third party cannot jump in during other conversation to declear "EMERGENCY" or "MAYDAY". Depend on the FM signal strength, the receiver only picks up the strongest signal. However, AM can have other jump in during the call and still be able to hear enough to give priority to the "MAYDAY" caller.
isnt there supposed to be some sort of system to detect runway incursion and potential conflicts?
Yes but no.
RAAS (Runway Awareness and Advisory System) only works to notify if they're approaching a runway, talking off/landing on a short runway, talking off/landing on a taxiway, remaining feet and etc. though this is usually installed on bigger commercial aircraft.
TCAS (Traffic Collision Avoidance System) only works in the air and is usually inhibited below 1000ft. This system is only required on aircraft of a certain size.
Airport Surface Detection Equipment, Model X (ASDE-X) is something that 35 major airports in the US has. Which is why aircraft has to switch their TCAS to TA (Traffic Avoidance/Alert) and not off. Normally would be in TA/RA in flight.
It was at night. And the normally red hold lines for the runaway were inoperable.
Pilot Flying should check for landing aircraft before entering any runway.
Pilot Not Flying should being listening to radio and double checking the Pilot Flying.
Tower heard the correct read back from both and expected the small craft to hold.
The landing aircraft didn't see the craft or its landing lights. In addition; due to correct read back by the offending aircraft that they had to reason to go around.
Simplest system which is around for decades is SMR Surface Management Radar. Displays aircraft locations on a map of the airport.
Enhanced versions add the aircraft ID from transponder data, and more enhanced versions give alerts on possible conflicts.
Going into implementation now is ASDE-X, which adds to SMR other data like ADS-B, GPS, etc which also should track vehicles and other stuff on the airport.
@@trilight3597tcas wouldn't have given a warning below 1000, but there should've been a dot indicating DHC's position right before both pilots' eyes. Maybe they didn't pay much attention to the instruments, or maybe for a busy airport like Haneda it was normal to see lots of dots near the runway, so they didn't really notice that one of them was right on it
I just heard that the Dash8 on the runaway didn't have a working transponder for ground radar; so that aircraft would've been invisible on ground radar too.
yes, all commercial airlines have ADSB to report plane location and automatic collision avoidance system to trigger alarm. But the coast guard plane either not has ADSB or don't follow civil aviation rules. On Sunday, June 6, 1971, Hughes Airwest Flight 706 had mid-air collision with aU.S. Marine Corps F-4B fighter jet. Back to the day, military jets are not required to report its location and/or follow ATC instruction. After that accident, FAA changed lots of rules.
why did not the crew of A350 notice a Dash 8 holding, why didn't they Go around, was the visibility low??
The A350 likely was in its flare, nose up and couldn’t have seen the Dash 8. A perfect storm of events. Like Blanco said, all the holes in the Swiss cheese lined up for something bad to slip through. And, a lot of people on different channels have been predicting a ground
accident was imminent. Tragic and could’ve been worse. I wonder how many countries’ pilots have trouble understanding different countries’ accents?
I don't think an aircraft flares for 40 seconds. The upper beacon light, and the anti-collision light should have been visible for at least 35-40 seconds. I'm not faulting the A350 pilots for this though, it's night time and it can be quite hard to tell what is what when all you see is white, red, green, and blue dots in front of you.
@@Shit_I_Missed. I was speculating, but others have said the same thing. I don’t know how long the flare was but yeah, 40 seconds would be a long time. Speculating might be a bad thing; just wait until the investigation is over. Is it known how long the Dash 8 was on the runway before the collision?
Regarding accents, I doubt that it played a role here. The main actors in this accident are Japan Airlines, Japan Coast Guard, Japan ATC. Any Japanese accent would be well understood by all involved. All readbacks were immediate and correct.
Wait, was the A350 cleared to land? Last instruction we got was "continue approach"
Yes. The A350 was cleared to land.
I'm not an ATC but I know what line up means
They should have said hold short at C5
information you provide is so vital. thank you
Even though the readback from JA722A is correct (taxi to holding point C5), if they overheard the tower saying "we have departure" to landing traffic, I believe it could possibly misled them, as the number 1 departing aircraft, to have priority before anyone else...
What really baffled me is how they lineup and waited for 40 seconds and not caught by the tower controller?
Well that is correct, 516 lands, the dash departs, and 166 lands behind him.
Now if the captain believed he was cleared for takeoff, I couldn’t imagine setting up shop on the active, I’d have lined up, and departed. Only thing I could think was if he imagined he had clearance to line up and wait AT C5, but if he was aware of landing traffic behind him, I’d have piped up pronto and asked about the hold (since there wasn’t anyone for which to hold in position)
There was another plane going to another runway that was given the instruction "line up and wait". Perhaps the CG plane mistook this along with the "we have departure" and "number 1" and confused it. But then, wouldn't the CG pilot have read back the instructions to the tower?
@@kirkhamandyThe line up and wait instruction was for a plane on a completely different runway
@@tmb1065"pilot thought he was instructed to "taxi onto runway and hold AT C5." That's literally not a thing, so no, the pilot did not think that
@@MotuSid Try actually rereading my comment. Why is the Internet full of people like you?
Why the tower did not correct JA722A for lining at the runway,when they stood there for 43sec before the accident.🧐
Sitting position and waiting for 43 seconds without asking ATC wtf is going on is inconceivable.
Entering an active runway without being cleared to do so is more concerning
@@MotuSid Of course.
My comment is from the perspective of the CG crew who assumed they were cleared to be there.
So, if you're thinking you're supposed to be line up and wait and are sitting for 40 seconds without questioning.....you're making more mistakes.
They were waiting for takeoff clearance.
@@k1mgy
And not questioning it's delay after 40 seconds is insane.
@@MyGoogleTH-cam 40 seconds is not that unheard of.
Why was the audio not recorded? Were they on the TWR frequency as well?
The audio was not recorded BY THE 3RD PARTY RECEIVER. 🤦♀
The recording available to the public via liveatc is not the same as what was recorded in the tower.
Going off of the information that has become available, it would seem as if the Dash 8 crew was to blame for the incident. I'm not sure whether the captain was lucky or unlucky to have survived the crash.
While probably true to a degree it's never quite that simple, this is definitely a systems failure as well, starting with the inoperative stop bar at the holding position, as well as a lack of runway incursion system. We'll have to wait and see the conclusions of the investigation to get the full picture.
@@Greippi10Yeah that stop bar was the last defence in this Swiss cheese sandwich... Seems from the NOTAM lots of other lights and systems were U/S too... Although not all related to the accident, does this show the airport is in some disarray? Like you said, it will all come out....
@@rodneywallace2984 We'll see, but I have this gut feeling that rather than being in disarray it's once again more about getting comfortable and complacent because nothing has happened. There's always a certain acceptable threshold of things that can be out of order, and accidents like this question it.
Like they say regulations are (often) written in blood. Runway incursion systems do exist, but still aren't that common from what I understand.
@@Greippi10 The stop bar is not usually operated unless under low visibility conditions, per the airport SOP. Pilots should have easily seen the markings on the taxiway, and other signs, that tell them to stop.
@@Greippi10 100%....hindsight is a wonderful thing although usually brought about by tragedy 👍
Last November, I attended a reunion of Sky Creation, a Japanese-owned flight school under FAA. It was held at a restaurant in the building of RJTT T1, called Big Bird, which provides visual access to the runway 34L-16R.
I have several opinions, but this time I express just this. I do hope that NO crews on JA722A are guilty, or legally judged responsible.
It'll be interesting to see what changes are made to the airport and beyond due to this accident. It seems so avoidable if anyone or system would have noticed the potential collision.
The industry needs to ditch radio voice comms in favor of a system more reliable, accurate and safe. In before boomers screeching in the replies THIS IS HOW WE ALWAYS DID IT YOU CAN'T TAKE OUR RADIOS AWAY FROM US REEEE
This makes little sense to me. The systems in place can always be overhauled, streamlined and improved, but by the end of the day, this wasn't a system that failed to do its job, it was a pilot moving to a place where he should not have been.
It wouldn’t be that hard from a technological standpoint (I would imagine) to install some sort of sensor to dectect an aircraft passing beyond the runway holding point. And that sensor could be directly connected to the tower and probably also for example to the PAPIs (maybe have the PAPIs flashing) to indicate that the runway is occupied by an aircraft.
@@bosshog8844 Radio wasn't the issue. The pilot received clear instructions, repeated them loud and clear... and then didn't follow these instructions and ended up on a runway, that he was not supposed to drive on.
It's like making rules for new bumper designs in response to someone having a drunk driving accident. You want to work on something that had no influence on what was going on.
And just for the recod: Radio has been in worldwide use on every airport thousands of times every day for decades. That is a tremendeous safety recrod on display.
I suspect they're going to suggest no intersection departures on a mixed use runway. At least when entering at the end/start you don't risk a crash on accidental incursion (except if the landing airplane tries to land on the numbers)
I don’t understand why the Coast Guard first officer did not see the A 350 on final, and why the crew in the A350 did not see the red rotating beacon , anti collision strobes , taxi & landing lights on the coast guard aircraft and initiate a go around.😢
We love Japanese people. Respect from Bangladesh.
Excellent job, Victor. This clarifies much, and actually pretty much holds with the things I was able to learn over the past few days & posted about. Everyone tries to throw out their ideas on what happened, and speculations- the mass majority NEVER do this out of malice, but out of a genuine concern, as to how in the hell something like this could have happened, so that next, we can begin to toss out SOLUTIONS- so something like this might never happen again.
NO, we are not the "authorities". That should be blatantly obvious- we're concerned citizens, enthusiasts, AARF, ATC's, Private & Commercial Pilots.
You trolls who come on here to attack posters as some kind of, "threat" to the safety of, say, the Captain who made the mistake, to the point that we'd be putting his "live in danger", or suggesting "suicide"?
I'm gonna destroy you... with words. Imma call you out. Imma embarrass the living hell out of you. And I'm going to make you appear, as exactly what you are- A threat to innocent people. I'm not gonna play games with you, and I'm NEVER gonna be intimidated by your idiocy.
Not only will I defend my own posts? But those who are also posting as they should, and always do. But above all, I'll be here defending Victor, and other channels who cover all this information. So if y'all think you're gonna harm or shutdown people or channels?
Good Luck.
(Felt I needed to address some of the idiocy I saw over the past few days Victor. If you feel this post isn't something you want on your channel? Please, feel free to delete it, with ZERO hard feelings, whatsoever.)
@@LeTangKichiro I agree with your assessment for the most part? And normally, I don't give regular trolls the time of day.
However, these people I'm speaking about, are quite different. These are people out trying to destroy channels & people on TH-cam. Maybe "troll" was the wrong word to use...
Let me copy/paste what just one said on my post, maybe it will help clarify what I'm talking about:
@SiSi-ju1xk
16 hours ago
0:28 Where is the audio.. . very bad .. spreading misinformation to make sure a pilot gets killed by provoking the public.
================================
This is a post specifically created to get my account shutdown. Or possibly even Victors. It's basically an attack, not a "troll".
Having lost accounts many times before? I had to learn more than I ever wanted about things of this nature.
But for regular trolls? You're 1000% correct. Not worth our time & effort. Better to band our heads against a brick wall, lol
And I thought American ATC spoke fast.
He says "Taxi to holding point C5 as number 1, JA722A. Thank you." While this sounds rather unambiguous, why is there "number 1" reference both from tower and pilot? Also, while subsequent "thank you" can be simple politeness, maybe the pilot who communicated misinterpreted that "number 1" and thanked for being placed for a takeoff position?
It seems to me that those guys in the cockpit were tired and they heard what they wanted to hear... tragic.
Silly question but if there's no recording, how do they know what was said? (I know the transcript was released by the authorities, but where do they get it from?)
The recordings available for government regulators come from the ATC towers, but the recordings available for people like Victor to make TH-cam videos come from LiveATC which is made up of volunteers running recorders that may not have antennas as good as the ATC tower or located at the airport.
@@robwkarren Thanks! That makes way more sense now.
Cost Guard airplane lined up for 43 seconds ON the runaway before JAL landed. 43 seconds ! What were the ATC guys doing?
Overworked japanese = mistakes
Busy with other airplanes. That is not the only active runway of the airport.
Its remarkable that the crew and passengers all survived! Credit to the crew for getting everyone out! That must have been pure chaos!
The mere fact the 350 crew kept that aircraft straight and on the runway is astonishing, truly great piloting, remembering they had no nose wheel steering.
@@stuartf2946 Planes have a dashcam. We'd all be interested to see it if it's ever released. The pucker factor must have been code red for the pilots.
@@whiskeymonk4085while some aircraft have tailcams, the footage is not stored on the FDR so will be lost.
here you can get the full uncut inside video from landing till evacuation recorded by a passenger
th-cam.com/video/SBLfnwhiJ1Y/w-d-xo.htmlsi=c7g8GIfV9jh9qoY3&t=93
@@smitthone Hey thanks!
I fly a 1995 hawker 800 and even this plane has TCAS and would have alerted me of a plane on the runway, and if not we have 2 iPads and an iPhone on board with Foreflight.... The dash 8 is entirely to blame, but the fact that the a350 didn't see them and the plane didn't issue any alert, I find it amazing... That Dash had to have the transponder off, the lights off and the crew of the 350 must been super tired not to have noticed the other aircraft.... Anyway we were not there and can not judge them.... RIP..
It will be good to see if any new regulations come out of this unfortunate accident. In airports that have no radar to for ATC to see the planes on the ground, would it be extreme to both require stop bars, and that they be functional? (You can mitigate downtime with redundancy -- perhaps keeping a backup stop bar available should one go offline)
Stop bars in Haneda are only used in poor visibility conditions
If the airport was equipped with stop bar, new regulations may be put in place that they will be used or the runway is shut down. Especially at a busy airport there shouldn't be an excuse to be operating with semi-functional equipment.
This one is definitely pilot error. Coast guard was instructed to hold at C5, not enter the runway. Fatigue is likely a contributing factor given the recent earthquake.
I have 3,000 hrs over hundreds of flights all over the world and in all weather conditions, and I’ve NEVER sat in the middle of a busy runway at night for 43 seconds for reasons which are all too obvious. Seriously WTF?
They were simply following orders, they were told to wait and they waited.
@@Idkmanihatethislol no, not on the runway
that must have sounded terrifying sitting on either plane, just loud metal crunching and an insane jolt
Audio for "taxi to holding point C5" is available.
Reminds me of the accident years ago at LAX between a USAir 737 and a metro liner. Nearly identical
so you telling me they basically landed on the aircraft
pretty much. they touched down 150-200ft behind them, nose gear touched the ground and slammed into the other plane less than 2 seconds later.
@@sirmonkey1985 Pretty sure that is not correct. You're describing a direct on-ground collision if the nose gear was on the ground and the A350 had already fully landed 150-200 feet prior. That would have resulted in many deaths aboard the A350 if that was the scenario. It seems to me that the A350 clipped some part of the Dash 8 as it was landing--i.e. came down from above, not head on--and the fact it was able to continue down the runway and the pilots didn't even realize what had happened at first makes me think it was maybe the rear of the A350, or part of the wing, that just happened to clip the Dash 8--maybe even not by a lot, but just enough to cause the destruction it did.
@@canadaveThe nose cone of the 350 was f-ed up
@@sirmonkey1985 how they didnt see the other aircraft with all he lights
Yea, I think the Coast Guard pilot thought holding point C5 meant line up and wait, which it does not! "Holding point C5" is the ICAO way of saying "holdshort Runway 34R at C5."
As a retired controller, night ops are the most difficult. ATC issued the correct instructions, the CG didnt comply improperly by lining up on the runway. Being told #1 at C5 does not authorize runway access. Intersection departures are encouraged as they are more efficient use of runway spacing intervals...
43 seconds!? how did they missed the plane just standing there in the runway
I heard the CG plane's transponder wasn't working so he wasn't visible to other planes or ATC.
It’s extremely hard for ATC, and nearly impossible for the pilots of approaching aircraft to visually see a small aircraft lined up on a runway at night. The ATC also either missed the warning from their runway incursion system, or didn’t receive one to begin with. Remember that ASDE-X, which automatically detects runway incursions, is still in the early stages of being implemented in airports, and is not implemented at Tokyo Haneda to begin with.
@@osmanapaydin7212 agree with all, but ASDE-X has been around for a hot minute now at 35 airports in the US. Program was "completed" in 2011, and has been in operation even at some smaller than core 30 airports for at least 5 years. It is a specific system and perhaps Haneda had some other kind of system that was intended to provide more runway awareness. If Haneda did have a working system like ASDE-X though, we wouldn't be writing these comments.
The coast Guard repeated in a good way the readback...so.. Situational Awarness was lost from the coast guard crew ? Was there any distraction ?
Do runways need physical barriers, operated electronically by air traffic controllers, .. that only open when it is absolutely certain when the runway is safe to enter, .. to prevent future accidents like this?
Great presentations sir, very much appreciate what you do. Thank You!
I cannot understand how two simple technical safety measures have not been mandated:
1. GPS transponders on all aircraft and air-side ground vehicles. This would allow ATC to see the position of all vehicles on the ground or incoming and would allow automated warning systems to warn off aircraft attempting to land on runways that are not clear. We have automated collision warning in the air, why not on the ground?
2. Text messaging to supplement voice links between aircraft and ATC. This would enable clearances to be recorded on screen in unambiguous form and standard language avoiding reliance on pilots hearing voice messages possibly incoming when distracted and relying on noisy voice channels in what may not be the first language of either party.
Together, these two systems should also be able to issue automatic warning within the cockpit if it strays into an area it does not have clearance for.
1. Some people stated that DHC didn't have ADS-B, but not sure about that one
2. Texting instructions isn't that practical, especially in an airport like Haneda. Moreover, a pilot monitoring is responsible for communication, which is on of his most important roles. There's not distracting him: he doesn't have to control the aircraft while listening&speaking to atc
@@american3502 Texting should be standard in busy airports that has atleast 5 takeoff and landing hourly
HND’s SMR did apparently register the possible conflict, but apparently the controller says he was busy with something else and didn’t see it. SMR does not use ADS-B data, it’s an active radar that uses transponder data for aircraft ID.
CPDLC is in testing worldwide, but still not usable for critical urgent messages: “CPDLC is a two-way data-link system by which controllers can transmit non urgent 'strategic messages to an aircraft as an alternative to voice communications. The message is displayed on a flight deck visual display.”
They are not simple systems, they are very complex, and have the burden that they must work 100% everywhere, which is not easy to achieve.
@@PRH123that's interesting if there was a warning to the tower controller that was possible for them to ignore or miss. Maybe it should be changed to a loud alarm until the controller presses a button to silence it.
What you suggested about text is very difficult to do, CPDLC is only use during non critical phases of flight ( like requesting departure clearance, gate number and such), we still need radio communication because it’s fast, and it allows everybody on the same frequency to share the same information.
Lots to go over here in the way of what caused the crash. But come the end of it, the cabin crew absolutely ruled in getting that Airbus evacuated and no more lives lost. Bravo to their professionalism and training.
How on earth did everyone evacuate and survive after a fireball like that. Wow.
The airplane fuselage is made of carbon fiber plastic,light yet very strong 😊
there are procedures for that. That's how.
Offical report is it took 18 minutes. Yes, how did they survive.
well, the fireball was probably from the smaller aircraft that was just being destroyed, while full of fuel.
Only one of the people in that aircraft survived.
The people in the A350 were shielded from the fireball by the A350 fuselage... Yes, that started burning as well later, but my point is that the fireball did not affect the people in the A350, because their fuselage held on and they were safely inside at that point
@@trr4488 18 minutes before the last person (the captain) evacuated. I'd be interested to find out how long it took the passengers to evacuate.
1. JA722A read back the command,
2. The stop bar light is broken,
3. We should wait for more information about JA722A black box.
Wild that the one who caused the crash is the only one who survived! 😅 that would be hard to live with. Humans make mistakes.
Not sure why anyone would put a smiley face in that kind of comment.
JA722A didn't HOLD at C5 as directed and read back.... Did the active runway lights add to the accident???
Two things I can think off could have prevented this:
1. Haneda should have ground warning radar (which can be IN-OP on the day, or it might not have due to it's part military nature)
2. The Japan Coast Guard plane should have turned on it's Landing lights. (The strobes and NAV lights can blend into airport lights, while the flood lights of the Landing Lights are almost impossible to be mistaken... It should be standard procedure to turn the landing lights on when lining-up for take-off. But from the A350 pilots' testimony, they didn't see anything until moment before impact, so I assume the Japan Coast Guard‘s plane didn't turn their landing lights on...
Regardless this shouldn't happened and very preventable...RIP to the Japan Coast Guards and hope the captain can recover from this...
HND has SMR which was working and apparently displayed the possible conflict, but apparently the controller stated they were busy with something else and not monitoring it
SMR’s not military and has been around for a long time…. more modern versions add aircraft id from transponder data, and even more modern versions have notification of possible conflicts…
I’ve seen comments from ATP’s that turning on the landing lights for takeoff depends on the airline, some do it only when they start rolling…
As far as I know, the Japanese coast guard is not military. Also, I think this was visible on the security cam video, the coast guard plane had its landing lights switched on. This is already procedure. But the plane was already lined up and thus pointed away from the Airbus.
@@NekiCat Are we sure the landing lights were on? I agree with @AaronShenghao that those would have been much easier to see. But looking at the security cam video, I can't say that they are clearly on.
Tower's transmission to 722A at 0:58 did get recorded on LiveATC. Check around 15 minutes 12 seconds.
The tower never look at runway in normal operations? is insane to think they stay there for 40 seconds..
Not all the time. Especially at night.
Often they also handle multiple runways as they did tonight.
Main cause is on the smaller offending aircraft.
But the airport has some inoperable hold lights; but there are 3 checks the pilot co-pilot missed.
Remember this EXACT thing happened to Skywest 5569 and USAir 1493, except Skywest was given ‘position and hold’, the dash wasn’t.
There were several planes lined up and waiting at C1. The dash8 got to cut in line and take off mid-runway from C5 since it's a smaller plane that doesn't need the full length. So there are a bunch of flashing lights out there. Some airports used ground based radar to try and avoid incidents like this. Because a human can't keep track of everything from a tower hundreds of meters away.
At night, from far away, with a bunch of other stuff going on. It'd be really hard to see that plan was over the hold bars and on the runway.
1:51 Do you all understand? This pilot is in tears.
It is incredible that an airplane can locate the runway and land automatically but not tell the crew when there is an obstacle on it.
Think about the vision? Comming down they can not see much and its night time.
It is incredible but I guess the autopilots don't need to "locate" the runway - the coordinates for 34R at that airport aren't going to change, autopilot probably just needs good GPS, IMU, speed, altitude readings to line the plane up etc. Detecting something on the runway would require completely different sensors to be on the plane, although it doesn't seem like it's out of the realm of possibility for the airport itself to have better monitoring equipment given the risks involved. Surely once a runway has been allocated for use there could be a detection and warning system monitoring it for intrusions at the ground level, wonder why there isn't.
Locating a localizer/glideslope beacon and a physical object are two totally different things...
@@jontylewis7301 Like $90 worth of parts on Sparkfun. Including the AI dev board to do object detection.
So less than a hundred bucks to teach my drone to not crash into things.
@@jontylewis7301 Some (35) airports in US have Airport Surface Detection Equipment. Unclear whether Haneda had it.
I am so impressed that the passenger plane had any survivors much less all of them. Its a tragedy that the coastguard lost the 5 members but this should have been so much worse. RIP
I thoroughly enjoyed your use of shadows to show the altitude of JAL516 as it came in. 👌
43 seconds ??? That's very long in this case😭
they were doing their takeoff checklist on the runway.
@@commandosolo_Danny_Secarylights, props, heading, GET MOVING