CharlieH Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgrahmm Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 Great - we fly out in a few days....🛫✈️ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Daley Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 Not one of their horoscopes predicted it. 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Hanaguma Posted January 2 Popular Post Share Posted January 2 From what I heard, the JAL airliner hit a small Coast Guard plane on the runway that should not have been there. It was ferrying supplies up to the earthquake zone on the Sea of Japan coast. Tragically, the Coast Guard crew were all killed or injured. It is amazing that the A-350 was evacuated so quickly and with no serious injuries. A testament to JAL training, and also Japanese peoples' social cohesion. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
still kicking Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 So 5 people died Japan plane crash: Five dead after passenger plane explodes into flames during landing at Haneda Toyko airport | news.com.au — Australia’s leading news site Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieH Posted January 2 Author Share Posted January 2 Summary Five people aboard a Japanese coastguard plane have died after their aircraft collided with a passenger plane at Tokyo's Haneda Airport The coastguard plane was due to deliver aid to areas hit by Monday's deadly earthquake All 379 people on board the burning Japan Airlines plane were evacuated, the airline said Dramatic footage showed passengers fleeing the Airbus A350 on inflatable slides and running across the tarmac Fire ripped through the Japan Airlines flight 516 which had taken off from Hokkaido in northern Japan nearly two hours earlier 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rimmer Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 There is a very good piece on youtube that examines the crash, it talks about the three evacuation slides that were deployed and why the other slides were not deployed and how the CG Dash aircraft was apparently cleared to C5 entry point to the runway. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_sQ1L_xPmo&t=432s 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asiansnow Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 According to NHK it seems that the pilot of the coastguard is saying he was given clearance to take-off, even if the ATC recording we have suggest he was only given clearance to wait on a taxiway just before the runway. I wonder if the Coastguard have their own ATC radio channel that might explain the discrepancies? 16 hours ago, CharlieH said: Why are you quoting the BBC on a topic that pertains to Asia? Try to find a more accurate Asian source, ideally from the country that is discussed, when discussing topics in Asia. 2 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawaiian Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 2 hours ago, Rimmer said: There is a very good piece on youtube that examines the crash, it talks about the three evacuation slides that were deployed and why the other slides were not deployed and how the CG Dash aircraft was apparently cleared to C5 entry point to the runway. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_sQ1L_xPmo&t=432s Thank you. An excellent explanation of a what could have been a tragic loss of almost 400 lives. NPR aired a first hand account from a reporter that happened to be on another flight landing right after this incident. She evidently witnessed the crash from the air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawaiian Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 This from NPR https://www.npr.org/2024/01/02/1222442383/japan-plane-runway-fire 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tug Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 Superb job by the cabin crew to have such an outstanding outcome kudos! It will be interesting to find out just who was at fault darn lucky to have such a positive outcome!my condolences to the coastguard crews loved ones.there was a similar accident at lax 20 years or so back with a much much worse outcome I’m sure lessons learned from that tragedy had a direct outcome on the more positive outcome of this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Drake Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 2 hours ago, asiansnow said: According to NHK it seems that the pilot of the coastguard is saying he was given clearance to take-off, even if the ATC recording we have suggest he was only given clearance to wait on a taxiway just before the runway. I wonder if the Coastguard have their own ATC radio channel that might explain the discrepancies? Why are you quoting the BBC on a topic that pertains to Asia? Try to find a more accurate Asian source, ideally from the country that is discussed, when discussing topics in Asia. I actually agree with you. I get tired of seeing stories about the USA sourced from the BBC or The Guardian. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youreavinalaff Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 (edited) 3 hours ago, asiansnow said: According to NHK it seems that the pilot of the coastguard is saying he was given clearance to take-off, even if the ATC recording we have suggest he was only given clearance to wait on a taxiway just before the runway. I wonder if the Coastguard have their own ATC radio channel that might explain the discrepancies? Why are you quoting the BBC on a topic that pertains to Asia? Try to find a more accurate Asian source, ideally from the country that is discussed, when discussing topics in Asia. Are you suggesting BBC don't have journalists in Asia? Are you suggesting the don't have offices in Asia? Are you suggesting BBC don't have partners within Asian media? Edited January 3 by youreavinalaff 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youreavinalaff Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 2 hours ago, Tug said: Superb job by the cabin crew to have such an outstanding outcome kudos! It will be interesting to find out just who was at fault darn lucky to have such a positive outcome!my condolences to the coastguard crews loved ones.there was a similar accident at lax 20 years or so back with a much much worse outcome I’m sure lessons learned from that tragedy had a direct outcome on the more positive outcome of this one. Isn't the worse ever air disaster, by way of lives lost, still the PanAm and KLM collision on the runway in Tennerife? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KhunBENQ Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 (edited) 5 hours ago, asiansnow said: Why are you quoting the BBC on a topic that pertains to Asia? Try to find a more accurate Asian source, ideally from the country that is discussed, when discussing topics in Asia. We welcome a newbie moderator Brazen nonsense! Edited January 3 by KhunBENQ 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impulse Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 I'm not sure of the accuracy, but here's a scary report. https://www.usatoday.com/story/graphics/2024/01/02/japan-coast-guard-plane-crash-graphics/72083108007/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tug Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 9 hours ago, youreavinalaff said: Isn't the worse ever air disaster, by way of lives lost, still the PanAm and KLM collision on the runway in Tennerife? For sheer terror and loss of life in my opinion JAL flight 123 in 1985 takes the cake a 747 packed to the gills the aft pressure bulkhead ruptured creating a burst of air strong enough to blow the vertical stabilizer off the crew managed to keep her in the air for 32 minutes without hydraulic pressure till they finally clipped a ridge and crashed over 500 dead 1 survived there are actual photos taken by some of the passengers during their ordeal yeiks!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawaiian Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 According to Nikkei Asia the Coast Guard plane was NOT cleared for takeoff. This information came from the Ministry of Transportation. Link not furnished because of paywall. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgealbert Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 (edited) 2 hours ago, Hawaiian said: According to Nikkei Asia the Coast Guard plane was NOT cleared for takeoff. This information came from the Ministry of Transportation. Link not furnished because of paywall. Yes never cleared to enter the runway. This is the transcript released by Ministry of Transportation. JA722A told to taxi and hold at C5. Edited January 4 by Georgealbert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Monday Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Correct. Most of the news reports today are saying the Coast Guard plane was not ”Cleared for takeoff” They were never even cleared to enter the runway. Taxi to holding point C5 means taxi to the C5 intersection at 34R only and hold short of the runway. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgealbert Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 38 minutes ago, Captain Monday said: Correct. Most of the news reports today are saying the Coast Guard plane was not ”Cleared for takeoff” They were never even cleared to enter the runway. Taxi to holding point C5 means taxi to the C5 intersection at 34R only and hold short of the runway. Appears that the captain of the coastguard plane has said to investigators that he was given permission to enter the runway. This is not shown in the Ministry of Transportation, released translation of ATC messages. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/police-probe-possible-negligence-tokyo-runway-collision-2024-01-03/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billd766 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 22 hours ago, asiansnow said: According to NHK it seems that the pilot of the coastguard is saying he was given clearance to take-off, even if the ATC recording we have suggest he was only given clearance to wait on a taxiway just before the runway. I wonder if the Coastguard have their own ATC radio channel that might explain the discrepancies? Why are you quoting the BBC on a topic that pertains to Asia? Try to find a more accurate Asian source, ideally from the country that is discussed, when discussing topics in Asia. How about because it is a world news topic and not exclusive to Asia? The BBC and other INTERNATIONAL news sites cover events occurring worldwide. https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/02/travel/tokyo-plane-crash-safety-rules-analysis-intl/index.html Are you suggesting that ONLY news reports from the countries concerned be allowed to post news from their own countries, and in their own language only? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asiansnow Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Since the Coastguard says that it's piolt believed he was given clearence to be on the runway, then the issue is most likely human error or some sort of distrubance with the radios. 1 hour ago, billd766 said: How about because it is a world news topic and not exclusive to Asia? The BBC and other INTERNATIONAL news sites cover events occurring worldwide. https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/02/travel/tokyo-plane-crash-safety-rules-analysis-intl/index.html Are you suggesting that ONLY news reports from the countries concerned be allowed to post news from their own countries, and in their own language only? The BBC along with most national broadcasters have limited resources and political biases that don't give you an accuate picture of what's happening in Asia. The US has a handful of news media companies with wide presence in certain regions (CNN has affiliates in India, FOX globally, SKY in Europe...) but they still have the problem of political and cultural biases towards the western world or certain political biases. When discussing Asia it's always best to use news sources from Asia because they tend to be more in-depth and often involve the party concened; you can use a western news source to guide you but it's akin to using Wikipedia for your thesis. Imagine if you went to FOX News to find out what the Democratic party platform was? Or NBC/SKY News to find out what the Republicans wanted to do in Florida? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgealbert Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 25 minutes ago, asiansnow said: Since the Coastguard says that it's piolt believed he was given clearence to be on the runway, then the issue is most likely human error or some sort of distrubance with the radios. The BBC along with most national broadcasters have limited resources and political biases that don't give you an accuate picture of what's happening in Asia. The US has a handful of news media companies with wide presence in certain regions (CNN has affiliates in India, FOX globally, SKY in Europe...) but they still have the problem of political and cultural biases towards the western world or certain political biases. When discussing Asia it's always best to use news sources from Asia because they tend to be more in-depth and often involve the party concened; you can use a western news source to guide you but it's akin to using Wikipedia for your thesis. Imagine if you went to FOX News to find out what the Democratic party platform was? Or NBC/SKY News to find out what the Republicans wanted to do in Florida? Can not see how it was a radio issue, JA722A repeated the message back to ATC, at 17.45.19 ‘Taxi to holding point C5 JA722A No1, Thank you’, which was their last transmission, quoted from the Ministry of Transportation translated ATC messages. (Unless you think that is not a reliable source also). Sorry, but do you really think that bias does not exist in all countries? Can you point out anything wrong with the BBC reports? Have a look at the freedom of press report on Japan below. https://rsf.org/en/country/japan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youreavinalaff Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 53 minutes ago, asiansnow said: When discussing Asia it's always best to use news sources from Asia because they tend to be more in-depth and often involve the party concened; you can use a western news source to guide you but it's akin to using Wikipedia for your thesis. How about BBC Studios Japan Ltd. Offices in Tokyo. A news source in Asia. Perfect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgealbert Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Read this report on an aircraft investigation site. The reports are from the two ongoing investigations, 1. By JTSB, (supported by team from France (airbus), Uk (Rolls Royce) Canada (Dash 8), air accident safety investigation. 2. Tokyo's Metropolitan Police who opened an investigation for professional negligence ‘On Jan 4th 2024 the JAL reported that actually 15 passengers needed medical attention. There were three pilots in the cockpit, none of them was able to see the DH8C, therefore a go around was never considered. After the aircraft came to a stop the cockpit crew was not aware of any fire, however, flight attendants reported fire from the aircraft. The purser went to the cockpit and reported the fire and received instruction to evacuate. Evacuation thus began with the two front exits (left and right) closest to the cockpit. Of the other 6 emergency exits 5 were already in fire, only the left aft exit was still usable. The Intercom malfunctioned, communication from the aft aircraft with the cockpit was thus impossible. As result the aft flight attendants gave up receiving instructions from the cockpit and opened the emergency exit on their own initiative. On Jan 4th 2024 Japan's Ministry of Transport stated that it appears the tower controller was not aware of the Coast Guard DH8C on the runway. The pilots of the A359 did not see the DH8C and are currently being interviewed by the JTSB. On Jan 4th 2024 Tokyo's Metropolitan Police reported in an interview with them the captain of the DH8C stated that suddenly a fire started in the back of or behind the aircraft. The Police is investigating whether the captain was aware there had been a collision with the passenger aircraft.’ Seems the pilots never saw the coastguard plane, either before and during landing, so would seem to have landed on or just behind the parked aircraft. Enhanced CCTV seems to show this also. 489115371442536501.mp4 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billd766 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 (edited) All the other reports that I have read clearly say the the coastguard aircraft was on the ground, which even the ATC recordings say it was. Where that CCTV tape came from I have no idea. Do you have a link for it? All it seems to show is some Japanese aircraft at an airport. there does not appear to be any time/date grouping on the video, and IMHO, without that the video is suspect. The collision happened at around 17:47 JST Japan Standard Time which is UTC + 09:00 hours. I have no idea if it was daylight, dusk or night time then, but the video seems to show that it is very dark. Edited January 4 by billd766 added extra text Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgealbert Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 (edited) Sorry, think you misunderstood my post, I state yes the coastguard aircraft is on the ground, in the CCTV you see it go past its stop point at C5 (in ATC messages) and wait for ATC clearance for takeoff, which it never got. The JAL aircraft can be seen landing near or on top of the waiting/stopped coastguard aircraft. The video is a recording from the live CCTV feed, and has been lightened and zoomed in. The current live cam below. The coastguard aircraft is currently being removed, other airport live CCTV Edited January 4 by Georgealbert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgealbert Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 (edited) Double post. Edited January 4 by Georgealbert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgealbert Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 20 minutes ago, billd766 said: All the other reports that I have read clearly say the the coastguard aircraft was on the ground, which even the ATC recordings say it was. Where that CCTV tape came from I have no idea. Do you have a link for it? All it seems to show is some Japanese aircraft at an airport. there does not appear to be any time/date grouping on the video, and IMHO, without that the video is suspect. The collision happened at around 17:47 JST Japan Standard Time which is UTC + 09:00 hours. I have no idea if it was daylight, dusk or night time then, but the video seems to show that it is very dark. This is one link to the original CCTV, showing time and date stamp. This is the CCTV footage from the airport itself, that has been used by every news source. The video I posted above is a zoomed version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now