sts7049 said:

---

I am aware it was the truck and company. but the controller was only speaking to truck 1

---

Every apparatus will be listening to both tower and ground control. They can hear it even if they are not being asked to respond. Truck One was in the lead and that was the one ground gave the clearance to cross. OTOH, ground did not tell the rest of company to hold and stand-by, and only Truck One could cross, that I have heard.

Did you hear a hold/standby direction to the company that I missed?

in the audio I heard truck 1 and company requested clearance to cross the runway.

it's in the vasaviation audio on p1

sts7049 said:

---

in the audio I heard truck 1 and company requested clearance to cross the runway.

it's in the vasaviation audio on p1

---

Thanks. Was my understanding as well. The entire company had clearance to cross...on an active runway with a flight on final.

If you watch the replay, the group stopped except for the first truck. ASDE-X tracks transponders and ADSB and yes they have that at LGA.

There is some sort of comm breakdown between the first truck and the rest. Questions to be answered: did the first truck miss the tower hold/stop instruction? If so why? Were other radios playing and distracting from ATC? Probably so. If the lead truck did not have a transponder, why was he the lead? (expect changes to come with that as well as ground crossing procedures.)

Emergencies introduce a hazard in the ATC environment that can be challenging; however, mix in night, rain, and transmissions being "stepped on," and then the situations can become very hetic.

There are communications screw-ups every day, and most are averted. This day it was not. I can assure you the controller and everyone in the tower is shook up regardless of the outcome.

aggiehawg said:

---

sts7049 said:

---

I am aware it was the truck and company. but the controller was only speaking to truck 1

---

Every apparatus will be listening to both tower and ground control. They can hear it even if they are not being asked to respond. Truck One was in the lead and that was the one ground gave the clearance to cross. OTOH, ground did not tell the rest of company to hold and stand-by, and only Truck One could cross, that I have heard.

Did you hear a hold/standby direction to the company that I missed?

---

Not sure which one is Truck 1. That is the call sign for that group/station etc. Could have been a different vehicle and not the lead. At DFW, we had different call signs for each station, but multiple vehicles used that one.

"Big Johnson" and "Little Pickle" were/are the names of two runways at Bergstrom.

Rapier108 said:

---

one safe place said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

I hope they don't get the bright idea of "let's replace all ATCs with AI!" and fire everyone even before the tech has been proven to work 100% (not 99%). But knowing how things work, I won't be surprised if they do it to grab headlines, cut costs and make bonus targets.

---

Self-flying aircraft could be the next step from self-driving cars.

---

Which wouldn't have prevented this accident.

And "self flying aircraft" will be fine, until something happens that the computer cannot figure out, flies the aircraft into a storm it should, or someone finds a way to hack it and turn the plane into giant cruise missile.

No thanks. I'll trust the human, as fallible as he may be, over a computer any day and twice on Sunday.

Humans aren't perfect, but they are still better than a collection of circuits which are only as smart as some computer programmer designed them to be.

---

It was sarcasm, I am opposed to self-driving cars and would be opposed to self-flying aircraft. Electronic crap is so prone to glitches, from you cell phone to your laptop to your iPad. When they malfunction or freeze up, nobody is harmed. People will be injured or die from self-driving cars and planes would be even worse.

AgNav93 said:

---

one safe place said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

I hope they don't get the bright idea of "let's replace all ATCs with AI!" and fire everyone even before the tech has been proven to work 100% (not 99%). But knowing how things work, I won't be surprised if they do it to grab headlines, cut costs and make bonus targets.

---

Self-flying aircraft could be the next step from self-driving cars.

---

I would never under any circumstances set foot on a pilotless aircraft. Just because you can do something does not mean you should.

---

Nor would I. I don't plan to ever be in a self-driving vehicle, much less an aircraft.

It sounds like the catastrophe of strained ATC resources trying to keep things moving but unable to maintain self-control. Consequently, the two pilots were killed, and over a dozen were injured in the collision between Jazz Airlines Flight 646 and a firetruck.

Is it me or do these accidents happen way more than they used to?

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Dacoldest said:

---

Is it me or do these accidents happen way more than they used to?

---

It's you. First, the 24-hour news cycle, then social media, then a movie camera in every pocket. Things get posted, amplified, and spread in milliseconds.



May have to open in new tab to see details

---

They say they come in 3's.

I would have been banned with my response but I like yours

agAngeldad said:

---

If you watch the replay, the group stopped except for the first truck. ASDE-X tracks transponders and ADSB and yes they have that at LGA.

There is some sort of comm breakdown between the first truck and the rest. Questions to be answered: did the first truck miss the tower hold/stop instruction? If so why? Were other radios playing and distracting from ATC? Probably so. If the lead truck did not have a transponder, why was he the lead? (expect changes to come with that as well as ground crossing procedures.)

Emergencies introduce a hazard in the ATC environment that can be challenging; however, mix in night, rain, and transmissions being "stepped on," and then the situations can become very hetic.

There are communications screw-ups every day, and most are averted. This day it was not. I can assure you the controller and everyone in the tower is shook up regardless of the outcome.

---

i missed adding this yesterday, but the NTSB clarified at the very end of the conference that none of the vehicles had transponders. more to come on this i guess.

Quote:

---

i missed adding this yesterday, but the NTSB clarified at the very end of the conference that none of the vehicles had transponders. more to come on this i guess.

---

Given the speeds, I don't see how a transponder on the truck would have mattered. We'll see in the detailed timeline, but given what they told us yesterday via their countdown to the end of the CVR recording, there certainly wasn't anything the pilots could do - the runway incursion happened too late. A transponder would have shown the truck sitting at the 'hold short' line until after the plane touched down.

The tower would be alerted to the incursion, but the tower had observed the incursion and told the truck to stop - it did not. Of course, the controller had given clearance to cross, but the truck should have been monitoring.

One thing I can't get past - and it isn't their fault - but I'm on approach to Runway 4 (almost touching down) and I hear the controller give clearance to cross - not a hold short and give way to the CRJ landing - but a clearance to the runway I'm about to touch down on - I'm at least inquiring of ATC and reminding them I'm touching down.

Aggie Jurist said:

---

Quote:

---

i missed adding this yesterday, but the NTSB clarified at the very end of the conference that none of the vehicles had transponders. more to come on this i guess.

---

The tower would be alerted to the incursion, but the tower had observed the incursion and told the truck to stop - it did not. Of course, the controller had given clearance to cross, but the truck should have been monitoring.

---

Couple of thoughts:

I have yet to see anything with radio traffic overlaid with the truck's position, so who knows if he had time to react.

Immediately before telling Truck One to stop, the ATC gave a stop instruction to a flight. Then, when the ATC did give the instruction to Truck One, it went something like "Stop, stop, stop, stop, Truck One, stop, stop, stop." Truck One may have missed the Truck One call out in the middle of the stops and believed this second instruction applied to the previously instructed flight.

it could have mattered if the computer monitoring positions was alerting to a possible conflict, like TCAS

i think we'll need to wait and see for more info on what actually existed and was available, to really know whether or not it could have helped. there was the other comment that the cluster of vehicles may have not allowed for the system to generate any useful alerts as well.

one safe place said:

---

AgNav93 said:

---

one safe place said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

I hope they don't get the bright idea of "let's replace all ATCs with AI!" and fire everyone even before the tech has been proven to work 100% (not 99%). But knowing how things work, I won't be surprised if they do it to grab headlines, cut costs and make bonus targets.

---

Self-flying aircraft could be the next step from self-driving cars.

---

I would never under any circumstances set foot on a pilotless aircraft. Just because you can do something does not mean you should.

---

Nor would I. I don't plan to ever be in a self-driving vehicle, much less an aircraft.

---

Self driving cars are far safer than human drivers. And they'll only get better. They'll save thousands of lives.

You wouldnt think this if you've seen these Waymos in action. They are noticeably bad. I see them doing dumb **** all of the time when I'm driving around Austin.

I dont know who gets in these things.

Aggie Jurist said:

---

Quote:

---

i missed adding this yesterday, but the NTSB clarified at the very end of the conference that none of the vehicles had transponders. more to come on this i guess.

---

Given the speeds, I don't see how a transponder on the truck would have mattered. We'll see in the detailed timeline, but given what they told us yesterday via their countdown to the end of the CVR recording, there certainly wasn't anything the pilots could do - the runway incursion happened too late. A transponder would have shown the truck sitting at the 'hold short' line until after the plane touched down.

The tower would be alerted to the incursion, but the tower had observed the incursion and told the truck to stop - it did not. Of course, the controller had given clearance to cross, but the truck should have been monitoring.

One thing I can't get past - and it isn't their fault - but I'm on approach to Runway 4 (almost touching down) and I hear the controller give clearance to cross - not a hold short and give way to the CRJ landing - but a clearance to the runway I'm about to touch down on - I'm at least inquiring of ATC and reminding them I'm touching down.

---

If the trucks didn't have a transponder on at least one of the trucks, they may have had ADSB. Those two systems work with ASDE-X and will give the tower an alert if they approach an active RWSL safety zone with aircraft on RWY. The alert may have triggered the controller. At one of the core 30+ airports I would be shocked if the trucks didn't have one or the other.

Still more data to uncover.

Again, it appears that all but one stopped. Unfortunately, systems improve with failure.

BadMoonRisin said:

---

You wouldnt think this if you've seen these Waymos in action. They are noticeably bad. I see them doing dumb **** all of the time when I'm driving around Austin.

I dont know who gets in these things.

---

Seems like Waymo''s are the Temu Teslas. All that spinning radar versus 6 cameras ad an iPad.

double aught said:

---

one safe place said:

---

AgNav93 said:

---

one safe place said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

I hope they don't get the bright idea of "let's replace all ATCs with AI!" and fire everyone even before the tech has been proven to work 100% (not 99%). But knowing how things work, I won't be surprised if they do it to grab headlines, cut costs and make bonus targets.

---

Self-flying aircraft could be the next step from self-driving cars.

---

I would never under any circumstances set foot on a pilotless aircraft. Just because you can do something does not mean you should.

---

Nor would I. I don't plan to ever be in a self-driving vehicle, much less an aircraft.

---

Self driving cars are far safer than human drivers. And they'll only get better. They'll save thousands of lives.

---

Just like they'll drive themselves, huh?

one of the big tidbits in the latest blancolirio video is that the runway status lights appear to have been functioning and showing red, but the truck still crossed the runway. that would be a big human error of the fire truck.

My dad's a pilot and one of his favorite jokes is how the ideal future flight crew is a pilot and a dog. The pilot's job is to feed the dog, and the dog's job is to bite the pilot if they try to touch anything.

With autopilot these days there's a lot of newer pilots who are trained to let the aircraft do the flying and not touch it unless it's an emergency. My father told me about how he was recently flying with a younger Captain (he's a career FO) who was having a hard time inputting some parameters into the autopilot (don't remember the specifics of the situation).
My dad said "Why don't you just fly it by hand then?" He said the captain looked at him like he had two heads.

sts7049 said:

---

one of the big tidbits in the latest blancolirio video is that the runway status lights appear to have been functioning and showing red, but the truck still crossed the runway. that would be a big human error of the fire truck.

---

Heard the same thing, at DEN, they will fire any driver that crosses the "RED". ATC and pilots have well-prescribed training and procedures. However, ground operations are always on a Letter of Authorization (LOA), which varies at each facility and does not provide the greatest redundancy.

SupermachJM said:

---

My dad's a pilot and one of his favorite jokes is how the ideal future flight crew is a pilot and a dog. The pilot's job is to feed the dog, and the dog's job is to bite the pilot if they try to touch anything.

With autopilot these days there's a lot of newer pilots who are trained to let the aircraft do the flying and not touch it unless it's an emergency. My father told me about how he was recently flying with a younger Captain (he's a career FO) who was having a hard time inputting some parameters into the autopilot (don't remember the specifics of the situation).
My dad said "Why don't you just fly it by hand then?" He said the captain looked at him like he had two heads.

---

Funny story. At DFW a fellow controller was issuing traffic to a pilot. The pilot kept telling him he couldn't see the traffic. After several attempts to get the pilot to see the aircraft, the controller keyed up and told the pilot to put the German shepherd in the cockpit. It was funny until they played the tapes back....

Aggie Jurist said:

---

Quote:

---

i missed adding this yesterday, but the NTSB clarified at the very end of the conference that none of the vehicles had transponders. more to come on this i guess.

---

Given the speeds, I don't see how a transponder on the truck would have mattered. We'll see in the detailed timeline, but given what they told us yesterday via their countdown to the end of the CVR recording, there certainly wasn't anything the pilots could do - the runway incursion happened too late. A transponder would have shown the truck sitting at the 'hold short' line until after the plane touched down.

The tower would be alerted to the incursion, but the tower had observed the incursion and told the truck to stop - it did not. Of course, the controller had given clearance to cross, but the truck should have been monitoring.

One thing I can't get past - and it isn't their fault - but I'm on approach to Runway 4 (almost touching down) and I hear the controller give clearance to cross - not a hold short and give way to the CRJ landing - but a clearance to the runway I'm about to touch down on - I'm at least inquiring of ATC and reminding them I'm touching down.

---

Has it been confirmed that the truck and the aircraft were both communicating with ATC on the same freq? The aircraft would have been on the tower freq, but was the truck on tower or ground? It's possible that the aircraft didn't hear the clearance for the truck to cross.

Honest question because I don't know.

Wouldn't the aircraft have the absolute right of way?

And at the point where this all started to go sideways was it too late for the aircraft to go around?

akaggie05 said:

---

Aggie Jurist said:

---

Quote:

---

i missed adding this yesterday, but the NTSB clarified at the very end of the conference that none of the vehicles had transponders. more to come on this i guess.

---

Given the speeds, I don't see how a transponder on the truck would have mattered. We'll see in the detailed timeline, but given what they told us yesterday via their countdown to the end of the CVR recording, there certainly wasn't anything the pilots could do - the runway incursion happened too late. A transponder would have shown the truck sitting at the 'hold short' line until after the plane touched down.

The tower would be alerted to the incursion, but the tower had observed the incursion and told the truck to stop - it did not. Of course, the controller had given clearance to cross, but the truck should have been monitoring.

One thing I can't get past - and it isn't their fault - but I'm on approach to Runway 4 (almost touching down) and I hear the controller give clearance to cross - not a hold short and give way to the CRJ landing - but a clearance to the runway I'm about to touch down on - I'm at least inquiring of ATC and reminding them I'm touching down.

---

Has it been confirmed that the truck and the aircraft were both communicating with ATC on the same freq? The aircraft would have been on the tower freq, but was the truck on tower or ground? It's possible that the aircraft didn't hear the clearance for the truck to cross.

---

i have not seen that confirmed yet. i think juan's latest video said the truck was communicating with the tower but frequencies have not been mentioned

Belton Ag said:

---

Honest question because I don't know.

Wouldn't the aircraft have the absolute right of way?

And at the point where this all started to go sideways was it too late for the aircraft to go around?

---

they absolutely have the right of way. but, if the truck drove through the red stop light then... you crash.

pretty much yes, they were cleared to cross with something like 10 or 15 seconds before impact. as soon as they touched down the pilot took control of the aircraft immediately and apparently tried to brake slow down right away but there was nothing more to do at that point. maybe they could/should have hit the TOGA, but you're really slicing thin on time to react here.

When they are covering two frequencies they are broadcasting on both at the same time.