To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
NYT said this morning that ‘they clipped each other’. A little more than that it would seem.
It’s kinda nice having you on Eastern time. It gives us early birds something to read in the morning.
At today’s overcrowded airports the real congestion is always on the ground. That’s where most of the accidents and near-misses take place. These superjumbo A380s don’t make it any easier.
“Luckily they were both on the ground…”
Well, if one were in the air and the other on the ground, they probably wouldn’t have hit! 😉
Did the air traffic controller lose a z-coordinate somewhere? Or maybe he was worried about having to work WITH NO FUCKING PAY during the government shutdown.
@1: Really? I think “clipped” is far more accurate than Slog’s “Planes Collide at JFK.”
Like a good Slogger, I blame Reagan.
“Clipped” would, indeed, seem to be more accurate. But why be mundane when you can be sensationalist? Goldy, I hope you’re taking notes here.
almost… enough clearance to go over the top of the tail of the RJ!
Given that the pilot of the 380 (who would be one of the highest rated and paid at AF) drove right past the unmoving RJ and then snagged him it will be interesting to hear how this plays out, discipline wise.
I was at Heathrow once, on a bus clusterfucking its way from one part of that hell hole to another, with a bunch of other buses that had been similarly directed right out onto the edge of the taxiway, where a jet was trying to turn around in a suddenly confined space. The wing tip cleared our window by some feet but when it’s coming right at you it sure as hell looks like it’s going to slice you in half. I wasn’t the only person who ducked down as it went past.
Years ago, my sister and I were trying to drive our rental car back to the Charles de Gaul airport and somehow wound up RIGHT UP AT A RUNWAY with a plane taking off, in our direction! We got the **** out of there ASAP and I sure hope that’s been more secured since, but it’s a heartstopper for sure. Those planes are f’ing huge. I, like @9 will be interested to see how this plays out since one plane was parked when it got sideswiped.
myr @9,
I worked at an airfield once upon a time. The pilot will probably have very little responsibility for this. It isn’t like driving a car. You can’t see much of the ground from the cockpit, and you don’t have much of a sense of distances and the space around you. Pilots rely almost entirely on the tower instructions and the ground crew flaggers to make sure they are clear.
Most likely the pilot went exactly where he/she was instructed to go, and the fuckup will fall on a bad instruction from the tower, or a ground crew mistake. The only way the pilot will get in trouble is if he/she didn’t follow the instructions from the tower.
excuse me, pardon me, excuse me
I’ve flown on one of those French Hummers. It’s so gigantic and ungainly, you really have to hold zealot-grade faith in modern aerospace engineering to travel on one. The 380 pilot probably could have rolled right over that tiny little Bombardier and not even notice.
@12 – aha – that makes sense… I remember now when I got to sit in the pilot’s seat once on a 747 (parked) and I recall now being amazed at how little of the actual plane itself you could see (though I do recall being able to see the tips of the wings) so I suppose it’s “go where I tell you when I tell you: when you’re driving around the airport – but looking at the video you gotta wonder as he went sailing by if he (AF pilot)wasn’t saying to himself “this doesn’t look right” – then again the copilot might have been “driving” in which case the left wing would have been completely out of sight!
What really strikes (!) me about the video is just how close the wing came to just going over the entire RJ.
If you’ve ever seen the French in ski lift lines, you’ll recognize the behaviour.
Funny thing about non-fatal aircraft accidents: they make the news when similar MVAs don’t.
Mind you, I suspect the insurance company is far less happy with this one.
It’s also possible that the little plane wasn’t parked in the right spot.If it was supposed to be 2-5m forward form where it was, the whole thing never happens.