quote:

Originally posted by 6guns:...

Yeah, that was supposed to be traveling speed. Pardon my fingers. And I was replying to the post right above mine regarding speed. I was not insinuating that 24 MPH was slow.

I hate autocorrupt.
Understood. I thought it was similar to "tooling along", so many newfangled speaks nowadays.

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:
...the fire truck should have easily been able to see the CRJ being close to touchdown. The landing and taxi lights are very bright. There's no mistaking it up above the horizon...

Three things:
The firetruck appears to approach and attempt to cross the runway at an acute angle which would make it harder to see down the runway.

What are the chances there's another firefighter in full gear sitting in the passenger seat the driver would have to look past to see down the runway? I know I have trouble seeing past my kid's bushy hair when looking to the right.

Three Army helicopter pilots couldn't see the landing lights of a CRJ over the Potmac River. Any chance there was a line of aircraft landing at LaGuardia before midnight and the firetruck driver saw a string of lights in the sky?

Just watched the FB video on pg 2. Looks like a pretty acute/blind angle for the fire truck, assuming LHD, the approaching plane would be in the blind spot, I think.

I am a private pilot. I am not a professional, but I know enough to be dangerous...

For all of the lay people out there, big airports are frightening places. It was night, the weather looks marginal, it is late in the day (speaking to shift work and how many hours into the work day everyone was at when this happened), there was a declared emergency occurring, there are lights everywhere (and I mean everywhere... center line markers, edge markers, strobes, ramp/gate lights, other vehicles, planes, etc.), and probably a dozen other things happening that we do not know at this point.

La Guardia, as well as JFK, and Newark (and the sky surrounding them) is some of the most complex flight operations in the US (in my opinion). If you have not seen it, watch the movie "Pushing Tin" and it only scratches the surface of what it is like. I have only flown around these air spaces. I have never had the balls to fly into them.

ALL of the people involved are highly trained professionals with a sole focus on safety. But they are all human, and although they work like hell to avoid it, they make mistakes from time to time.

This was horrible and from the transcripts and recordings I have heard, the controller knew immediately he had made a mistake.

I pray for the lives lost, the injured, and the controller. He was trying to do his job, was juggling a lot of balls, and one got away from him.

Speaking to the professionalism and high standards... It is amazing that there are so few errors and accidents that occur considering all of the opportunities there are for mistakes to occur, especially at this size airport.

I have never been involved in an on-field accident/incident and I credit the professionals around me for that (everyone from the guy who gasses the tanks, to the other pilots, to the tower/airport crews when I am at a controlled airport).

This message has been edited. Last edited by: bozman,

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:


What are the chances there's another firefighter in full gear sitting in the passenger seat the driver would have to look past to see down the runway? I know I have trouble seeing past my kid's bushy hair when looking to the right.

Three Army helicopter pilots couldn't see the landing lights of a CRJ over the Potmac River. Any chance there was a line of aircraft landing at LaGuardia before midnight and the firetruck driver saw a string of lights in the sky?

The guy in the left seat looks out his window and carefully looks for potential conflicts as they approach the intersection, but with enough time to stop if needed. Seeing no threats he clearly states "Clear left". The guy in the right seat looks out his side, and seeing no threat declares "Clear right". The driver then proceeds onto the active runway.

The driver need not be able to see everything himself.

As to a line of approaching aircraft viewed from the fire truck's position, aircraft are strung out vertically. Close in they are visually lower to the ground, further away they are higher. It isn't confusing when the aircraft are above the horizon relative to the viewer. The helicopter in DC was below the horizon relative to that CRJ, so it would have been extremely difficult for the CRJ pilots to see it. The Helicopter pilots failed to adequately look. Every aircraft has obstructions to vision such as window posts, so it is proper technique to move to see into those blind spots.

The same goes for a vehicle on the airport, especially moving onto active runways or taxiways. If the driver cannot verify it is clear and safe to proceed, he must stop.

That doesn't deny that there are challenges to seeing.

I wasn't there so I don't know for sure on any of this, however I'll share a few observations. from a video clip I saw overlaying traffic with video.

Touchdown point was about 1100' from the impact point

Jet was likely landing around 150mph, although decelerating closed that distance in 4-6 seconds

Fire apparatus ARFF (60,000-100,000lbs) was rolling when it called for clearance to cross Runway 4 at Taxiway Delta, a lot of momentum there even at 25-30 mph.
Side Note: These apparatus are also between 35'-44' long, around 10' wide, and 10-11' tall.

Clearance was requested by Truck 1 and given to cross active runway, clearance acknowledged by Truck 1 and they continued to cross Runway 4 on Taxiway Delta.

Tower called 'Frontier 4195 stop there please' This is important as I believe it influences the outcome.

Next Tower traffic: "Stop stop stop stop truck 1 stop stop stop" If you listen to the traffic the 'Truck 1' is very short and likely not discernible. Proper protocol would be "Truck 1 stop stop stop" It is likely (as I thought the first time sounded like Ugh not Truck 1) the ARFF crew thought Tower was trying to get Frontier 4195 to stop as they were not. They likely would have ignored this as not traffic for Truck 1. Likely too late to avoid a collision of some sort.

Next Tower Traffic: "Truck 1 (this is proper protocol and got their attention) Stop Truck 1 Stop Truck 1!

Unfortunately at this point it appears Truck 1 was already on the active runway and at speed, in the dark and in wet conditions. Video appears that he tried to slow and turn to avoid but it was too late. I've never driven one, but trained with them and had a Captain who was Air Force CFR, he described them as 'not very nimble'.

I'm not a regional jet pilot but my aircraft engineering background wagers that full power and pulling back to climb would have failed as well.

It appears the granting of clearance for Truck 1 to cross the active when an aircraft was on final was the key element, after that it is unlikely to me that anything else would have avoided a ground incursion.

Hopefully better, timestamped video with audio will be available soon.

Just read through the thread. Two things to add. Juan Brown calculated impact speed at around 135MPH. Also of note, It was Truck one and company. The "and company" part means there was a chain of multiple vehicles. I see at least three or four in the video online. So they'd have been crossing for a minute or two by the time the last cleared.

^^^I was wondering what the "and company" meant.

This video seems to show the firetruck was communicating with the tower, not ground control, in asking to cross the runway and as such could have heard the pilot and the tower and vice versa. The cockpit voice recorder audio will be telling.

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:
The guy in the left seat looks out his window and carefully looks for potential conflicts as they approach the intersection, but with enough time to stop if needed. Seeing no threats he clearly states "Clear left". The guy in the right seat looks out his side, and seeing no threat declares "Clear right". The driver then proceeds onto the active runway.

The driver need not be able to see everything himself.

As to a line of approaching aircraft viewed from the fire truck's position, aircraft are strung out vertically. Close in they are visually lower to the ground, further away they are higher. It isn't confusing when the aircraft are above the horizon relative to the viewer. The helicopter in DC was below the horizon relative to that CRJ, so it would have been extremely difficult for the CRJ pilots to see it. The Helicopter pilots failed to adequately look. Every aircraft has obstructions to vision such as window posts, so it is proper technique to move to see into those blind spots.

The same goes for a vehicle on the airport, especially moving onto active runways or taxiways. If the driver cannot verify it is clear and safe to proceed, he must stop.

That doesn't deny that there are challenges to seeing.

Thank you for the great explanations. It would seem the firetruck driver has some culpability.

I fail to understand how AI is not going to be the best air traffic controller, our infrastructure in air traffic control needs a ground up rebuild.

quote:

Originally posted by Timdogg6:
I fail to understand how AI is not going to be the best air traffic controller, our infrastructure in air traffic control needs a ground up rebuild.

Is this something under development for ATC?

quote:

Originally posted by Timdogg6:
I fail to understand how AI is not going to be the best air traffic controller, our infrastructure in air traffic control needs a ground up rebuild.

I agree, it's inevitable. Hell, even non-A.I. software should be able to handle this better than depending on the memory of one human being. I really feel bad for that guy. That's too much to ask of a single fallible human.

I can't imagine a future where A.I. isn't primary flying the planes (with human override support) and in contact with (orchestrated and a part of) A.I.-ATC.

Not that they could be assured of seeing the aircraft, it was night, but all the aircraft lights would be on, even with a clearance from tower/ground to cross, how much attempt was made to look themselves that it was clear?

It was the active landing runway at a busy airport, they would know all that. Driving around an airport in almost any capacity takes a handful of training. Yes they were being called to an ‘incident’.

Let’s compare a little to a police vehicle responding to an emergency call, busy road to cross with a traffic light. The police car has priority, does the officer blindly go through the red light at 65 mph?

I’m not ripping on ‘New York’s finest’, just saying, this was a known, busy, landing runway. It was a point to break the chain. Of course, the controller was the main element.

With aircraft, we verify, then look ourselves, even with a clearance from ATC. I’ve been 121 since 1993.

quote:

Originally posted by sourdough44:
I’ve been 121 since 1993.

121 = FAR Part 121 Regularly Scheduled Air Carriers

Refers to normally scheduled airlines such as American, Delta, Southwest, United and many others. Also includes FedEx and UPS.

I recently retired from FedEx as a B757 Captain and flew Falcons in the Coast Guard before that.

The primary cause of this accident is likely going to be controller error as he cleared 2 entities onto the same runway at the same time.

Every pilot is taught to visually clear the runway when landing, but of course that is more difficult at night in 4 miles vis and rain with hundreds of lights on the airport surface.

I can't tell you how many simulator sessions I was told by ATC to go around due to a vehicle or aircraft on the runway. I instructed and often used that as a method to get the crew to execute a go around procedure. So it's ingrained in us to scan for that when landing.

As Fly-Sig mentioned, we each scan down the runway when crossing and verbally announce to each other either clear right or clear left EVERY time. Again it's ingrained in us.

I can't speak to the training that the rescue truck drivers receive, but I've got to believe that they have similar procedures in place for crossing active runways. The landing lights of the aircraft are pretty bright but should have been visible, but perhaps the right seater was distracted or just missed it, influenced perhaps by years of experience that tower doesn't clear you and company with a jet on short final.

So both crew were cleared to be where they were and both are charged with continuously visually clearing their flight (or ground) path. There was a break down in that safety chain and they either didn't see the other or it was too late once they did. Tragic.

I feel for that controller because of the breaks in the chain, clearing both on the runway at the same time was most likely the primary factor. A terrible mistake that he will have to live with.

The investigation will figure it all out and perhaps improvements in procedures and training will come out of it.

Meantime prayers for those pilots and cabin crew, rescue truck crews, the passengers and the controller. What a crappy night.

quote:

Originally posted by r0gue:
Hell, even non-A.I. software should be able to handle this better than depending on the memory of one human being. I really feel bad for that guy. That's too much to ask of a single fallible human.

Except that’s not what happened. There were multiple checks within the system that failed, starting with the controller. The fire truck driver failed to see the plane before attempting to cross the runway. If it’s true that the fire truck, airplane, and controller were all on the same frequency, then there could be additional checks that failed: neither the fire truck driver nor the pilots recognized the conflict the controller’s instructions created. I really don’t know what the expectation for the pilots would have been. The controller gave instructions to the Delta pilots who then acknowledged those instructions, so it seems pilots would be listening to the radio in case any instructions are given. At the very least, they are listening for their flight #, but do they also listen for instructions involving the runway they were cleared to land on? Should they have caught the conflict created when the tower cleared the firetruck to cross the runway the plane was cleared to land on?

I don’t believe for a second that the system is built around one person’s perfect performance of his duties.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:

it seems pilots would be listening to the radio in case any instructions are given. At the very least, they are listening for their flight #, but do they also listen for instructions involving the runway they were cleared to land on? Should they have caught the conflict created when the tower cleared the firetruck to cross the runway the plane was cleared to land on?

I don’t believe for a second that the system is built around one person’s perfect performance of his duties.

Yes, the pilots are expected to be as aware as possible of "The Big Picture". That means both are attending to what else is going on over the radio. Knowing who is landing ahead and behind you is valuable information for all kinds of reasons. Knowing if/when traffic is cleared to takeoff or land on a crossing runway is important. Knowing about traffic crossing your runway is important.

Under normal circumstances, the non-flying pilot won't be very busy during the final minute of flight. All checklists are completed about 5 miles out, and in this weather they wouldn't be executing an instrument approach to really low minimums. The non-flying pilot would be looking out the windshield, verifying their alignment with the correct runway, assessing crossing runways for traffic, and verifying his understanding of "The Big Picture".

The flying pilot will normally transition from instruments to visual as soon as possible, while scanning back to instruments to verify flight path and speed. He is verifying correct runway and alignment, as well as verifying his "Big Picture".

The CRJ 900 is fully automated. Assuming no last minute changes of approach or runway, the crew is heads-up and relatively calm the last 5 miles to landing.

Yes, human errors happen. All kinds, with many precipitating causes. The assumption is always that something will not go per plan.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Except that’s not what happened. There were multiple checks within the system that failed, starting with the controller. The fire truck driver failed to see the plane before attempting to cross the runway. If it’s true that the fire truck, airplane, and controller were all on the same frequency, then there could be additional checks that failed: neither the fire truck driver nor the pilots recognized the conflict the controller’s instructions created. I really don’t know what the expectation for the pilots would have been. The controller gave instructions to the Delta pilots who then acknowledged those instructions, so it seems pilots would be listening to the radio in case any instructions are given. At the very least, they are listening for their flight #, but do they also listen for instructions involving the runway they were cleared to land on? Should they have caught the conflict created when the tower cleared the firetruck to cross the runway the plane was cleared to land on?

I don’t believe for a second that the system is built around one person’s perfect performance of his duties.

It is certainly possible that the firetruck was on ground frequency until shortly before crossing the runway. I would not assume that he heard the jet’s landing clearance. It may or may not have been possible for occupants of the truck to discern the jet from the other lights. Wasn’t there, don’t know.

The pilots should have heard the controller clear someone to cross the runway they were about to land on. That ought to have set off alarm bells in their minds. Whether they were in a position that they could have gone around at that point, I don’t know.

Going around in a typical general aviation single is pretty much instantaneous - not much inertia and piston powered propellers “spool up” (add thrust) very quickly. Light twins aren’t much slower. Passenger jets have a lot more inertia and may not spool up nearly as quickly. Something else to think about is “If you’re right on the edge and may or may not make it either way, then not making it while accelerating and adding energy to the collision is going to be a LOT uglier than not quite stopping in time.” Had they added power to go around and not made it, there’s a good chance nobody would have survived.

I haven’t read all the details but it is quite possible Jazz never heard the fire truck comms because they might have been on ground freq and the aircraft was on tower.

Taxiway D is very close to any reasonable touchdown point. Jazz would be hauling the mail at that point.

Once you put out the reversers (which they probably did) a go around is NOT an option.

Lots of potential heroes (firetruck seeing a/c, pilots seeing firetruck, none of that happened though) but the blame here is the controller. They have been using single controllers to perform many tasks for awhile. Don’t know if this was the case here buts it’s possible.

Human error is perhaps the hardest problem to solve in aviation.

The fire truck was talking to tower, not ground when it requested clearance to cross the runway.

The NTSB confirmed this during their media briefing today by providing a summary of the plane’s cockpit voice recorder. It’s at 3:15:

Yikes. The only thing that stands out to me is it sounds like they completed the landing checklist below 1000 feet (after the 1000 ft automated call EGPWS). This potentially makes you wonder if they had gotten behind because that should have been done prior to that altitude. Then from there missing the radio call cues isn’t hard to imagine. Avoidable but that’s easy to say from my lounger. It certainly will be a topic tomorrow at work I’m sure.


Keep your head on a swivel boys.

I haven't had time yet to listen to the NTSB briefing. Finishing the Before Landing Checklist below 1000ft is unusual. In the CRJ900 the gear goes down just before the final approach fix, which would be at about 5 mile final and 1500 ft AGL (above ground level). The flying pilot calls "Gear Down, Before Landing Checklist". The non-flying pilot moves the gear handle down and reads the checklist. There are no additional tasks at this point to be completed other than putting the flaps down to landing configuration, just read and verify.

As I recall, flaps would be at 8 prior to calling for gear down. Then it would be gear down, flaps 20, flaps 30.

Either they had other things going on that delayed reading the checklist, or they were late getting to final flaps which thus delayed reading the checklist. At my airline we were required to be in final configuration and on speed at 1000 AGL. It is curious to me what happened, but perhaps not at all relevant to them missing that trucks would be crossing downfield.