Flight International - June 30, 2015 UK

AIR TRANSPORT

ightglobal.com 30 June-6 July 2015 | Flight International | 11

Thailand resolves

to clear ICAO audit

AIR TRANSPORT P

P

oor signage and lighting at
Johannesburg contributed to
a British Airways Boeing 747-
crew’s inadvertently following
a narrow taxiway before the
jet’s wing sliced into a service
building.
But the inquiry into the
accident, which demolished part
of the building and led to the 747
being written off, also says that
the pilots did not brief the taxi
route and were unaware of a
caution note in the aerodrome
chart warning of potential
confusion risks.
South Africa’s civil aviation
authority says that the pilots suf-
fered “loss of situational aware-
ness” while taxiing in darkness
for runway 03L ahead of depart-
ing for London Heathrow on 22
December 2013.
The crew had expected the air-
craft to be facing north after push-
back and had discussed a taxi
route that would take the 747 out
of the apron area, before turning
south along taxiway A – which
ran parallel to the runway.
But the pushback clearance in-
stead told the crew to face south.
While this instruction was nor-
mal, the crew had not expected it,
and queried the clearance among
themselves before confirming it
with air traffic control.
After engine start, the crew
was cleared to proceed along a

SAFETY DAVID KAMINSKI-MORROW LONDON

Signage played part in 747 accident

BA pilots suffered “loss of situational awareness” but directions at Johannesburg airport were inadequate, says report

BRITISH AIRWAYS 747 WING-STRIKE INCIDENT

ToATweCr

Taxilane Mike

Taxiway

Bravo

Apron

Threshold

runway 03L/21R

Operations BuildingBidAir Services

Johannesburg

OR Tambo International

Taxiway

Alfa

Missed

junction

SOURCE: South African Civil Aviation Authority

Expected route

Actual route

different taxi route, following

taxiway B. This took the aircraft

south, out of the apron, but after

600m it crucially curved to the

left at a junction. Not following

this curve, but continuing

straight ahead, would take the

aircraft along the narrow taxiway

M with buildings in close

proximity.

Despite the different taxiing

instruction the pilots “did not

alter their expectation and

review the new route”, says the

South African CAA, adding: “If

they had, they might have

foreseen the conditions on

[taxiway B].”

The report states that a review

might have resulted in the crew’s

discussing the critical curve at

the junction and prepared them

to look for cues.

But the inquiry also deter-

mined that signage at the junc-

tion where taxiways B and M di-

verged was not adequate to warn

crews. Some taxiway B centre-

line lights had not been function-

ing, it adds, while continuous

blue edge lights feeding into taxi-

way M added to a “false percep-

tion” by the captain that the air-

craft was still on taxiway B.

Some 10s before the collision

the first officer, who was han-

dling the aircraft, expressed con-

cern about the width of the taxi-

way. The 747 was travelling at

14.5kt (27km/h) when its star-

board wing carved into the Bid-

Air Services building, injuring

four employees.

Although Johannesburg’s ad-

vanced surface-movement sys-

tem detected the aircraft’s en-

croachment on to taxiway M, it

had not been fully commissioned

and monitoring was “solely at

[air traffic controller] discretion”.

Around 1,000kg (2,200lb) of

fuel spilled from the 747’s tanks,

BA estimated, although the

investigation was unable to

calculate a precise figure. None

of its occupants was injured.

The 1990-built aircraft

(G-BNLL) sustained extensive

damage to its wing and was sub-

sequently parked and broken up.

South Africa’s CAA points out

that the circumstances were simi-

lar to those of an incident involv-

ing another British Airways

747-400 (G-BYGA) at the same

airport in April 2005. The crew

had entered the narrow taxiway

M after becoming confused by

unclear markings and the aircraft,

unable to manoeuvre, had to be

pushed out. ■

http://www.cmcelectronics.ca/C4000NG

Bridge the Training Gap

With Cockpit 4000 NexGen

Confi gurable Glass Cockpit for Military Trainer and ISR/Attack Aircraft

• Low-profi le digital HUD


• Smart 20”x8” large area display with touchscreen


• Open mission system architecture