Planes collide on tarmac at Melbourne Airport

[FlyboyAl]

Part 2...

Well done...
View attachment 17820

Which "engine" is it?

 

[Austman]

Which "engine" is it?

The APU of the A320. Mounted in the tail.

 

[FlyboyAl]

I didn't think it actually "hit" the APU engine, otherwise bits and pieces would be everywhere (or so someone said!)
Don't forget I'm being a little pedantic here about how the media words their articles!

 

[mannej]

I didn't think it actually "hit" the APU engine, otherwise bits and pieces would be everywhere (or so someone said!)
Don't forget I'm being a little pedantic here about how the media words their articles!

My point as well...

 

[markis10]

I didn't think it actually "hit" the APU engine, otherwise bits and pieces would be everywhere (or so someone said!)
Don't forget I'm being a little pedantic here about how the media words their articles!

You mean like this picture:

If you count the exhaust and muffler as part of the engine, as opposed to hitting the turbine!

 

[FlyboyAl]

Ooops, sorry I didn't see the chunky bit in the foreground. Guess it came close to creating an "exciting" incident

 

[markis10]

An update from the ATSB:

Updated 13 August 2013
On 10 August 2013 at approximately 0930 Eastern Standard Time, a Boeing Company B737-8FE VH-YID with 6 crew and 168 passengers was being pushed back from gate E1 at Melbourne Airport terminal. An Airbus Industrie A320-232 VH-VGR with two flight crew was stationary on a taxi line, behind and to the left of the B737, waiting to dock at gate D2. During the pushback a collision occurred between the B737 and the A320 resulting in damage being occasioned to the left winglet of B737 and the tail cone of the A320. There were no reported injuries to persons on the aircraft or to ground staff.
The investigation is continuing and will involve:

• examination of the two aircraft
• interviews with ground staff and flight crew of both aircraft
• examination of the recorded information
• examination of the operators’ procedures
• review of the relevant radio and radar data.

It is anticipated that the investigation will be completed by February 2014.

Looks like my scenario number 1 is possibly what happened, will be interesting to read the report explaining why a "pushback" clearance was given and why the JQ plane presumably did not tell the tower that they were infringing the apron movement area.

 

[markis10]

The ATSB has just issued an update with some very interesting info, the push back clearance was conditional on the Jetstar aircraft being at the gate!

Investigation: AO-2013-125 - Collision during pushback operations between Boeing 737-8FE, VH-YID and Airbus A320-232, VH-VGR, Melbourne Airport, Victoria, 10 August 2013

 

[maninblack]

So it's an old fashioned shmozzle. Looks like the JQ crew are in the clear though....we await the next installment...

 

[anat0l]

The ATSB has just issued an update with some very interesting info, the push back clearance was conditional on the Jetstar aircraft being at the gate!

That's more information but I don't think it still makes it clear who is at primary (or sole) fault.

How do you tell visually, being on the ground and not in front of the relevant aircraft, that an aircraft has now docked properly at the gate? If the aircraft stopped short of the mark for whatever reason, at a distance it would be quite difficult to tell it was on the right mark for park position, unless you could also see the guidance system display.

 

[markis10]

That's more information but I don't think it still makes it clear who is at primary (or sole) fault.

How do you tell visually, being on the ground and not in front of the relevant aircraft, that an aircraft has now docked properly at the gate? If the aircraft stopped short of the mark for whatever reason, at a distance it would be quite difficult to tell it was on the right mark for park position, unless you could also see the guidance system display.

Based on the information provided it makes it very clear, the clearance was conditional on the VA PIC ensuring the JQ aircraft was docked, that could have been done via a confirmation radio call, visually it could have been achieved by seeing the aerobridge moving into position (I beleive they don't move until the aircraft has confirmed just of NIGS is completed via radio and/or engine shutdown.

The other aspect that wont get coverage I suspect is why there was a need for a conditional clearance - the SMCA tower that used to be there would have had a controller pretty much on top of the JQ gate!

 

[pauly7]

Based on the information provided it makes it very clear, the clearance was conditional on the VA PIC ensuring the JQ aircraft was docked, that could have been done via a confirmation radio call, visually it could have been achieved by seeing the aerobridge moving into position (I beleive they don't move until the aircraft has confirmed just of NIGS is completed via radio and/or engine shutdown.

The other aspect that wont get coverage I suspect is why there was a need for a conditional clearance - the SMCA tower that used to be there would have had a controller pretty much on top of the JQ gate!

So who is coughing up the $ ?
Does it work like that?
I'm assuming both airlines have insurance for this sort of stuff...

 

[markis10]

So who is coughing up the $ ?
Does it work like that?
I'm assuming both airlines have insurance for this sort of stuff...

I would imagine insurance with JQs firm asking VAs firm for money, maybe they wait for the final report to work out the fault levels.

 

[pauly7]

I would imagine insurance with JQs firm asking VAs firm for money, maybe they wait for the final report to work out the fault levels.

Wonder how much excess VA has to pay

 

[nlagalle]

Wonder how much excess VA has to pay

There goes the rating 1 and no claim bonus!

 

[erkpod]

Wonder how much excess VA has to pay

There goes their safe driver bonus. No free trips to see the sunrise in Bali now!

Exchanging details would have been a pain!

 

[nlagalle]

There goes their safe driver bonus. No free trips to see the sunrise in Bali now!

Exchanging details would have been a pain!

If they had the AAMI app it would have been a breeze! Lol!

 

[erkpod]

If they had the AAMI app it would have been a breeze! Lol!

At least the ATSB will be doing the photos. I shudder to think what Instagram filters VA & JQ would have used.

 

[geordieladinoz]

The Australian reporting on this earlier today. I wonder who The Australian journalist is on AFF after the recent QF636 stories too?!

The JQ A320 has been on the ground for 3 weeks and ticking over apparently . . .

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

 

[markis10]

The Australian reporting on this earlier today. I wonder who The Australian journalist is on AFF after the recent QF636 stories too?!

The JQ A320 has been on the ground for 3 weeks and ticking over apparently . . .

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

Steve is well connected and often spot on with his reporting, news.com have a couple of good journos who know their stuff, he was one of the first to flag the ADL and PER cutbacks for QF.