JAL incident at Haneda Airport
I believe the FAA recently does actually allow for vehicles assigned to a runway to not require to obtain clearance everytime to enter or cross the runway it is on. Though I agree that generally everyone must obtain clearance.
My point was that stopbars alone would not stop an incident where the pilot genuinely believed he had a special exception to enter the runway. A negligent pilot could easily overlook a stopbar.
I agree that what I wrote was poorly written. I apologize.
Just to expand on my point:
https://pointsixtyfive.com/xenforo/t...rossings.2316/
My understanding is that there are certain cases where a vehicle can cross a runway without ATC approval in FAA land (not inherently Japan).
My point was that stopbars alone would not stop an incident where the pilot genuinely believed he had a special exception to enter the runway. A negligent pilot could easily overlook a stopbar.
I agree that what I wrote was poorly written. I apologize.
Just to expand on my point:
https://pointsixtyfive.com/xenforo/t...rossings.2316/
My understanding is that there are certain cases where a vehicle can cross a runway without ATC approval in FAA land (not inherently Japan).
Within ICAO standards which as far as I know Japan adheres to, anything on a runway needs specific authorisation from the specific runway controller to be there.
Again you mention a “special exception”. They do not exist.
Your reading of the .65 thread is incorrect. They are referring to a vehicle on a runway (with permission) crossing an intersecting runway.
For F sake, ICAO, FAA CAA, CASA, Who gives a f@ck? It should all be the same rules! This is LUNACY! The Jap Coastguard crew F'ED UP. END OF STORY!
The coastguard shouldn't have done the incursion.
The JAL crew should have seen the blocked runway.
On the last point, a retired airline captain friend pointed out that the strobe (or maybe it was a beacon, maybe I'm not sure) on the back of the Dash 8 was reported as central, and this might be harder to notice in amongst the centreline runway lights.
Last edited by aox; 19th Jan 2024 at 15:05.
Sir, what about the red and green nav lights on the Dash 8 wing tips? And the red beacon light on the tail? Do they also blend in with runway centreline lights?
I'm not a commercial pilot, and have only sat in the back at night a few times, not seeing other aircraft very much. But I live near an airport, and they pass over. There aren't as many Dash 8 Q400s as there used to be.
The diagrams I can see online illustrating standard nav lights have 110 or 120 degree field of view for the red and green wingtips, from straight ahead round to just behind the wing. White nav light on the back with 140 degree, symmetrical rearward. That agrees with what I thought I remembered. If so, the red and green wingtips are unlikely to be visible from behind
Some discussion can be found that some Q400s have white rather than red beacons, or two white and one red, red on top, white underneath and on tail. I can't remember whether previous posts here have specified the exact case for this aircraft. If there is one, is the red fuselage top one easily visible from the rear past the tailplane?
Last edited by aox; 19th Jan 2024 at 15:11.
A Q300 at night out of Toronto.
Put this right in the middle of the TDZ lights, centerline lights... except for the flashing aspect, no so easy to spot, if you ask me.
Put this right in the middle of the TDZ lights, centerline lights... except for the flashing aspect, no so easy to spot, if you ask me.
Last edited by DIBO; 19th Jan 2024 at 16:21. Reason: removed "TWY lights" from text
And with just slightly less vehemence, the "end of story" occurs at the end of the Annex 13 process.
JAL was looking down on the aircraft and as the aircraft was on the runway, dependent of course on SOPs, the landing lights must have been on.
It's unlikely to be coming towards you with a taxying light on the nose.
Also offset to the right on this picture, and even then not much RH wingtip lighting to be seen.
There is not much point in discussing to death the conspicuousness of the Dash 8, nevertheless one last pic for the "JAL should have seen" camp:
(I know, incomparable perspective, angle, background, etc, etc, but also a much 'darker' runway)
Where is the Dash 8 on the runway?
21st Jan 2024: Added the answer; the strobe flash (and only that) giving away the aircraft's position
Last edited by DIBO; 21st Jan 2024 at 11:46.
I can easily imagine how the JAL crew didn’t see the Dash.
When considering this it is worth thinking about
A) the level of expectation that the runway was clear ( thousands of landings and on every one the runway has been clear)
B) The brightness level of the touch down zone lights compared to the Dash lights
C) The shape that the lights of the Dash would make when mixed in with the TDZ lights….. would it be the outline of an aircraft?
D) The % of time the JAL crew are looking outside of the flight deck compared to the % they are scanning instruments and glancing at other areas inside the flight deck like landing gear indicators etc.
Either way the crew obviously didn’t perceive the Dash ( even if they saw it) so we must expect in the future that other equally qualified crew will sometimes fail to perceive an aircraft, in the TDZ, at night and concentrate the majority of our efforts on preventing and alerting runway incursions.
( opinion of someone who has never conducted an investigation).
When considering this it is worth thinking about
A) the level of expectation that the runway was clear ( thousands of landings and on every one the runway has been clear)
B) The brightness level of the touch down zone lights compared to the Dash lights
C) The shape that the lights of the Dash would make when mixed in with the TDZ lights….. would it be the outline of an aircraft?
D) The % of time the JAL crew are looking outside of the flight deck compared to the % they are scanning instruments and glancing at other areas inside the flight deck like landing gear indicators etc.
Either way the crew obviously didn’t perceive the Dash ( even if they saw it) so we must expect in the future that other equally qualified crew will sometimes fail to perceive an aircraft, in the TDZ, at night and concentrate the majority of our efforts on preventing and alerting runway incursions.
( opinion of someone who has never conducted an investigation).
I can easily imagine how the JAL crew didn’t see the Dash.
When considering this it is worth thinking about
A) the level of expectation that the runway was clear ( thousands of landings and on every one the runway has been clear)
B) The brightness level of the touch down zone lights compared to the Dash lights
C) The shape that the lights of the Dash would make when mixed in with the TDZ lights….. would it be the outline of an aircraft?
D) The % of time the JAL crew are looking outside of the flight deck compared to the % they are scanning instruments and glancing at other areas inside the flight deck like landing gear indicators etc.
Either way the crew obviously didn’t perceive the Dash ( even if they saw it) so we must expect in the future that other equally qualified crew will sometimes fail to perceive an aircraft, in the TDZ, at night and concentrate the majority of our efforts on preventing and alerting runway incursions.
( opinion of someone who has never conducted an investigation).
When considering this it is worth thinking about
A) the level of expectation that the runway was clear ( thousands of landings and on every one the runway has been clear)
B) The brightness level of the touch down zone lights compared to the Dash lights
C) The shape that the lights of the Dash would make when mixed in with the TDZ lights….. would it be the outline of an aircraft?
D) The % of time the JAL crew are looking outside of the flight deck compared to the % they are scanning instruments and glancing at other areas inside the flight deck like landing gear indicators etc.
Either way the crew obviously didn’t perceive the Dash ( even if they saw it) so we must expect in the future that other equally qualified crew will sometimes fail to perceive an aircraft, in the TDZ, at night and concentrate the majority of our efforts on preventing and alerting runway incursions.
( opinion of someone who has never conducted an investigation).
Imagine for a second if JAL had been given "Continue approach, Dash 8 departing shortly". I hazard to guess that even then the Dash 8 might not have been seen by a crew looking for it until quite late final.
516 or 166 ?
Add into that one of the things they heard after making contact with the tower was an instruction for an aircraft on approach to slow down as there was a departure, but they didn’t know that it was the one behind the A350. No.1 and traffic being slowed, lots of room for confirmation bias...
Several posters in this thread have confused JAL516 with JAL166.
Just curious...but does anyone know what's going on with the investigation? I've been looking for a Preliminary Report (due by now if adhering to Annex 13) and can find nothing. JTSB website appears to have very little information, even in Japanese.
The first meeting of the aviation countermeasures committee was held on January 19th.
Furthermore it was also found that the fire had originated from the "left engine" and all firefighting efforts were focused on this engine at the start. Later on firefighters wre focusing on moving the passengers into a suitable area.
The JCG captain was interviewed on January 25th, and apparently he had thought that the "Number 1" instruction by ATC gave him clearance to enter the runway (though this is a third hand account I'm reading from).
The US, UK, France, Canada and Germany are all invited to the investigation because the safety board wants to obtain as much information as possible considering that the entire plane was destroyed and possibly a lot of new information can be learnt from the incident even if it isn't related to the reasons behind the crash.
But no news on the investigation report itself.
And all information is based on third hand reports.
An expectation that if an aircraft were to be on the runway then it would be at the threshold not necessarily at C5. Just raising the eyes that little bit further might have gleaned recognition of something on the runway but if you expect nothing then the eyes see nothing.
Imagine for a second if JAL had been given "Continue approach, Dash 8 departing shortly". I hazard to guess that even then the Dash 8 might not have been seen by a crew looking for it until quite late final.
Imagine for a second if JAL had been given "Continue approach, Dash 8 departing shortly". I hazard to guess that even then the Dash 8 might not have been seen by a crew looking for it until quite late final.
The US, UK, France, Canada and Germany are all invited to the investigation because the safety board wants to obtain as much information as possible considering that the entire plane was destroyed and possibly a lot of new information can be learnt from the incident even if it isn't related to the reasons behind the crash.
Countries whose citizens have been lost in an accident can also send 'Experts' (state investigators) who will deal with any national interests, liaise with families and the like.
Pegase Driver
The JCG captain was interviewed on January 25th, and apparently he had thought that the "Number 1" instruction by ATC gave him clearance to enter the runway
I read another account ( also third hand) that fatigue is investigated and may have played a role.
The US, UK, France, Canada and Germany are all invited to the investigation because the safety board wants to obtain as much information as possible considering that the entire plane was destroyed and possibly a lot of new information can be learnt from the incident even if it isn't related to the reasons behind the crash.
Countries whose citizens have been lost in an accident can also send 'Experts' (state investigators) who will deal with any national interests, liaise with families and the like.
Interesting statement that needs a lot of further explanations to be credible and understood , specially re. his earlier statement that he obtained confirmation that this was correct by the rest of the crew. The CVR will clear that up I guess.
I read another account ( also third hand) that fatigue is investigated and may have played a role.
I read another account ( also third hand) that fatigue is investigated and may have played a role.