Back to Squawk list
  • 211

Video: Air France A380 Collision with Comair CRJ-700

Video of the collision at JFK Airport ( Ещё...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

preacher1 0
Couldn't reall tell but either the ComAir wasn't completly clear or the heavy was too far off the centerline. Either way, that looks tight.
Daniel Baker 0
The original reports were that the A380 "cilpped" the CRJ... that's not exactly what I'ms seeing in the video.
Toby Sharp 0
that is no clip.....if ground personnel were hooking/unhooking the tow-bar to the CRJ, they would have been killed. The 380 Captain appeared to be lazy and taxiing some what fast for that close to the terminal if you ask me. That could have been a very very bad situation.
Toby Sharp 0
I'd call it more of a "wing T-bone"
Chris Bryant 0
This is the problem airports are going to have with the A-380. It's just so friggin' big. You can be clear of the taxiway and that huge wingspan can still get you.
Christopher Rea 0
that 380 pilot needs to slow down.. and A380s are gay there too big. stupid Airbus. haha
Toby Sharp 0
@Christopher Rea. they're*.........Those are magnificent airplanes!
Ric Wernicke 0
Did the pilots hop out and exchange insurance information on the ramp?
flyingcookmosnter 0
Looking at the damage photos, its amazing how well the CRJ came out. Bombardier knows how to build em. Course, from the video its apparent that the A380 pushed down on the tail bringing the nose of the CRJ up which saved the RJ IMO.

Who to blame? The lazy rampers not being ready to guide the RJ in when it arrived. Hence it's empenage was exposed waiting for guide persons.
Ahhhh...yes...always "Lazy Rampers" UNLESS of course you mean that as a joke :) As for the A380 being TOOOOOO Big!! JFK, along with every major gateway airport around the world was studied well in advance of an A380 EVER beginning service to that particular airport. IF the A380 was on a taxi lane /taxi way it was not by printed Jeppsen charts and airport guidance permitted to be on then YES, the plane is to big. However on the flip side, if it were on a taxi lane deemed wide enough for it to be bubbles no troubles for the AF Capt. IMHO, the RJ stopped WAY to close to the edge, exposing the tail to the possibility of being hit. I have seen Capt. plenty of times with several different airlines begin to taxi down a lead in line, and hold them self short awaiting a guide person.
IF we had a gate number, we could then look at the charts for JFK and see how close it is to the taxi lane the Super was going down.

As for the statement above had there been a push back crew there by the nose, yes sadly someone probably would have died.
Patrick Smith 0
I think the relatively light damage to both a/c is more a result of physics than a/c construction. After all, F=m x a. And the A380's mass is rather large! The ride up at the front end of the CRJ must have been an "E" Ticket ride, though.
Robert Duke 0
Huummm, Ever try to drive a car in Paris? Their drivers drive the same! Get out of my way!!!
Fidel L Palermo 0
A-380, You were Taxing too fast.No time to look around. Captain, you should have see that.
hilda andrade 0
well guess whoever posted it got into trouble as it's gone...
willcoop 0
hilda andrade 0
seems they unposted the video.. whoever posted it probably got into hot water...
John Cotton 0
Here's another copy:
Jeremy Cox 0
Thats one way for Comair to get rid of planes without selling them.
dakotadoc 0
johncotton, thanks for re-posting the youtube link :)
hilda andrade 0
John Cotton 0
Steve Parker 0
Was thinking about Patrick Smith's comments about the "ride at the front end of the CRJ". No kidding. E-Ticket ride... And those people who loosened up their belts to get at carry-ons must have been tossed HARD in their seats.

But I do have to say that most people under 40 will have NO idea what "E-Ticket" refers to.... :)
Nige Lites 0
I saw a News Clip collected by Yahoo with a 'Gods Eye' simulation showing the RJ pause its taxi as a Pick-up truck passed in front of it;

In another report on Yahoo, sourced from Reuters, the photo (frame grab from the Video that's been doing the rounds) a Truck can be seen in front of the RJ with the nose of the A380 in the background.

Could be that in the delicate chorography of aircraft movements the RJ should have passed clear in front of the A380, but a dab on the brakes to avoid ground traffic left it with it's arse (that's Butt to our US readers) hanging out.
bwalko 0
Where did the video go? It has been removed from You Tube.
dakotadoc 0
nigelies, agree with your comments. As with most accidents, more than one thing has to go wrong at the same time. Just from a quick look, though, does seem like the 380 was taxiing way too fast for where is was.
Pat Clar 0
The AF captain was taxing on the centerline. What else could he do. In the video the RJ's wing is even with the amber outbound hold short lights. That means his tail was to close to the inner taxiway. It looks to me as if the RJ did not enter the ramp far enough to keep the taxiway clear. I fly in and out of JFK and I know that area can be a mess at times.
Nigel Service 0
Small point but these A380's are called "Super" as opposed to "Heavy" in Tx., I believe.
markaz 0
Some of my initial thoughts when I saw the vid already covered here, but the one hypothetical that's really scary is the possibility of the CRJ being hooked up to a tow at the time of the incident. If the nose gear could have withstood that kind of force the tow would have been tossed around like a Tinker Toy and God knows what would have happened to the driver.
Shaun Galbraith 0
Like a good neighbor, State Farm is There!!! Hahahaha.
Paraic Dooley 0
Why is the video clip gone typical AirFrance covering up another incident why cant they be just honest with the truth what are they hidding!!
Joe Green 0
When the A380 was introduced, I mentioned that an aircraft had now been built that was just too big. Also, I believe AirFrance was taxing way too fast.
CycloneJL 0
Here is a different clip with slow motion video and ATC recordings

This is precisely the reason why everyone must wear their seatbelt until parked at the gate.
Ian Murray 0
Just my 2 euro's worth from the south west of France. In the video did the van in the beginning of the tape cause any distraction to the Comair A/c, causing him to hold or shall we just wait for the accident report (this way we do not have to hang anyone who is innocent):)
dakotadoc 0
Minto31, I think most agree that the vehicle in the gate area had something to do with Comair failing to clear the taxiway. I am not a pilot, but was under the impression that the speed limit on taxiways when well clear of aircraft and in good visibility is 15 MPH. Does this apply to commercial aircraft at large airports such as JFK? Is so, sure looks like A380 was doing more than 15.
Joe Green 0
I agree. It appears he is moving quite a bit more than he should have.
dakotadoc 0
I also notice that AF A380 came to a complete stop while still visible within the frame of the video, which to me indicates that it was braking hard before impact.
harm buning 0
"This video has been removed by the user"
209flyboy 0
I agree, the 380 was moving too fast in that area. But being 4 stories high in a behemoth this large reduces ground visibility, clearance and speed judgment. It may be advisable for a plane as large as the 380 be push backed and towed further away from the terminal to a place where aircraft clearances are not an issue instead of taxiing with reduced visibility in a crowded terminal area. An accident like this will happen again unless procedures are put in place to prevent a reoccurrence.
harm buning 0
I found the repost, thank you....
Pete Alford 0
Let's just be glad there were no serious injuries reported and wait for the investigation to conclude. Probably will be more of these.
hilda andrade 0
well someday we're going to have a bad crash at Pearson International. i've been seeing quite a number of aborted take offs. The worst was last summer a large jet (sorry i'm not so good at naming the plane makes) which was a British Airways. coming over to land and guys this was really close as the planes fly over a building before the runway off Airport Road. There was an small air Canada jet, just stopped at the beginning. The sound that British Airways made was deafening when he went back up. Never seen anything like that and thank a higher power that the pilot was able to get up on time. Obviously the control tower was to blame i'm sure.
hilda andrade 0
sorry.. i meant to say aborted landings! :) fingers were too fast!
Ryan Heck 0
As a non pilot type I have only my reasonably extensive traveling experience to rely on when it comes to taxi speed. In early January I was on an inbound AF A380 from CDG to JFK and remember my wife and I briefly discussing that we seemed to taxi in much more quickly than we would normally expect. Is there a standard speed for all aircraft during taxi maneuvers? Or is it dependent on the type of plane or the the discretion of the pilot?
209flyboy 0
There is no established taxi speed, But, as every pilot knows and has been trained that you taxi no faster than a fast walk. Remember, there is no ground speedometer on the plane. This monster is too big for either captain or copilot to see clearly around the wings, body and below. I'm sure it will happen again some day.
David Butterworth 0
it`s a blessing they weren`t airborne.
Wally Piper 0
Hard to place blame. The truck wasn't an issue. The RJ was stopped waiting for the wingwalkers and marshaller. You can see them sprinting out at the beginning of the video. The 380 gets some instructions to yield to traffic at E which is pretty far away ahead of him just a second before the collision so his attention was probably drawn away from what was directly in front of him. Although it's his responsibility to look where he's going and see what's in front of him, that spot is very tight. Sort of like everybody was a little at fault - 380 cockpit for not spotting the RJ, RJ maybe for stopping a little shorter than he needed too but probably a spot where he's stopped before, controller for not saying anything to the 380 about the RJ crossing at a taxiway right in front of him as he cleared him onto A. One of those things where any one of them doing just a little better would have prevented the collision.
Wally Piper 0
hmm, now I see pointed out in the other thread that 553 is outbound from JFK (JFK to STL) so he had just been pushed back. There is a string of lights visible to his right (our left) which I guess are the lights on M. So he wasn't really ON taxiway M, he was just using it to report his position. At what point does control of the RJ pass to ground control? Can't tell but given his position, he might not have even started the engines yet. I conclude it's a procedural defect - failure of somebody at JFK to thoroughly check the clearance required to taxi the 380 around. If the RJ was sitting in a "normal" spot to be unhooked and start engines, then the collision was inevitable. Just a matter of the timing working out bad.
dakotadoc 0
wallypiper, do you agree with me that the 380 was already braking hard by the time it struck the RJ? Otherwise, how could they have brought it to a complete stop from the time of impact in just perhaps 80 feet, since the tail of the 380 is clearly visible in the video.
Wally Piper 0
Not sure doc. AF leaves from T1, which is right next to T2 where the RJ was being pushed back. He had probably just turned onto A and started to accelerate a little. Apparently the RJs have to be pushed into that position for engine starts - very tight little area with passengers walking on the ramp - and it puts there tail right at the edge of A. Maybe the AF crew spotted the RJ just as they pulled onto A and backed off the throttles but too late to avoid the collision. I stand by my earlier conclusion. It was a failure of AF, Comair and JFK to anticipate what was obviously going to be a pretty common occurrence and adjust their procedures for it.
Wally Piper 0
It's 130 feet to the wingtip of the A380. It's about 145 feet from the centerline of A to the edge of the ramp. The tail of a plane parked at the last gate at T2 would be about 240' from the centerline. If they push him back and turn him 90 degrees, that's got to put his tail awfully close the wingtip of a passing A380 (or a 747 for that matter). Maybe they were a little sloppy with the pushback, a little farther back than they're supposed to go. Again, it's a very congested spot.
Alexandre Sanchez 0
I don't know if the tail mounted cam is installed in the A380 but if it is it could help to use it in situations like this. Of course in preparation for t/o I am not sure de cap nor the first off would have time to look at the came while taxiing.
steve Mellor 0
Somebody is going to get their butts kicked for this , I get the feeling the A380 skipper could get the blame for this . Did he take a chance i ask myself and assume he had wing clearence , his taxing speed looked fast . However its procedure here at some airports in the uk to have some form of point man at the back to give the marshaller clearence between the live taxiway and the ramp onto the aircraft stand T target . Iam not aware of how they do this in the states .
Wim Derksen 0
380 was going too fast. But hey...a flight deck full of french.
Hopkins Holmberg 0
On the day of the accident I heard a report that FAA had required an expansion of taxiways that were to handle A380s (do I remember from 90' to 120'?). But JFK asked to be exempted, and that was granted. An extra 30' would have made a big difference. FAA and JFK were both wrong.


Нет учетной записи? Зарегистрируйтесь сейчас (бесплатно) и получите доступ к конфигурируемым функциям, уведомлениям о статусе рейсов и другим возможностям!
Этот веб-сайт использует файлы cookie. Если вы будете просматривать или пользоваться этим сайтом, вы даете на это свое согласие.
Вы знаете, что реклама помогает FlightAware в отслеживании рейсов?
Вы можете внести свой вклад в бесплатную работу FlightAware, разрешив показ рекламы на Мы следим за тем, чтобы наша реклама была полезна и не мешала работе с сайтом. Вы можете быстро включить рекламу на FlightAware или приобрести привилегированное членство.