Video: Delta planes collide on Atlanta taxiway, rattling passengers

[@TheHuskyType]

You know Boeing was like… thank god they didn’t mention us again! 😂😂😂

[@fastica]

For real!

[@k4ktus.s147]

It wasnt a Boeing

[@matthewbaynham6286]

That's right, it's completely Boeing's fault.

[@Thisandthat8908]

@@k4ktus.s147 i think that was the humorous intention of the initial comment....

[@miked5539]

Boeing was like means what in English?

[@Nolan45000]

The passengers on that southwest flight got a free show

[@MMBricky]

The southwest: don't mind me lads, just passing by

[@KyVisuals]

Southwest minding its own buisness 😂

[@DitsMerzthalBravo]

Thank u for calling it a taxiway and not a tArMAc

[@Isai_Calderon]

Tarmac sounds cool compared to tax-iway 😂

[@codymoe4986]

Tarmac is a surfacing material used for roadways, consisting of crushed rock and tar. If both the runway and taxiway are made from the same material, wouldn't they both be "the tarmac"?

[@alidycepaisley3829]

The use of tar or aggregates to form a material that will comprise a surface does not mean that surface is made tarmac. Tarmac was a specific method of use for those things. AFAIK tarmac is no longer in use as a surface for any infrastructure on any airports or on any infrastructure surfaces outside of airports. It was popular in the 1800s and especially the early 1900s but has long since been phased out in favour of concrete or asphalt and those are specific things unto themselves. Although you will find it in the dictionary as a general word for any hard surface at an airport fashioned for the movement of planes, the use of the word tarmac to refer to all such surfaces is ultimately a bit of a misnomer along the same lines as calling all airport surfaces intended for the movements of planes runways.

[@pishyp]

Black tar is more better

[@risksrewardsrelics51]

The term tarmac encompasses the taxiways, runways and apron at the airport… basically any paved surfaces that is used by aircraft. Either taxiway or tarmac would be appropriate for this situation.

[@DrJohn493]

No tower miscalculation in this incident. Runway/taxiway geometry is very well planned out, designed and constructed to avoid these kinds of incidents. Runway/taxiway configurations must meet FAA airport design standards. And the design engineers do a good job doing that. This incident is on either the CRJ crew or the A350 crew for not being where they shoulda been to avoid this collision. Based on this video clip, the CRJ plane does not appear to be properly positioned. The A350 crew cannot see their wingtips from the cockpit but the FO could have observed the CRJ was holding too far short of the taxiway stop bar.

[@duncandmcgrath6290]

Ok so … all airports are built to only an FAA standard. The threshold of a taxiway to a runway is called a Hold Line . The pilots can see there wingtips in an A350.

[@meddyven]

It is irrelevant wether the CRJ 900 was not up far enough. The A350 crew was clearly not paying attention. There were other aircraft in front of the 900. They may have had to stop just short of their intended position. The A350 is high enough to have full view of those smaller aircraft. The First Officer should have told the Pilot in Command to halt. The wing of the mainline aircraft, was a good degree past the vertical stabilzer, when it struck it. Probably 10-12 feet, based on the video. Somebody needs to be fired! These mainline pilots are always in a hurry to take off. There was an incident in SLC, over a month ago, where a Delta aircraft that was 3rd in line, bypassed two jets in front of him, and clipped wings with the 1st aircraft. Nonsense!

[@davidcass4958]

I agree, the RJ was not pulled up to the stop bar, had he been pulled up where he was supposed to be, the a350 could have easily cleared!

[@raygale4198]

@@duncandmcgrath6290 A pilot can cannot see the wing of an A350 from the pilots seat. It has swept back wings, if the pilot was to stand up out of his seat swivel around and press his face against the side glass maybe he could.

[@peglegjim57]

🎯🎯🎯

[@brianbishoptv]

It looks like the CRJ was just too far back and it kind of got in the way of the A350.

[@mijo3642]

that is exactly what happened

[@LoganAviation]

@@mijo3642PRECISELY! Had they pulled up further, the A350 would’ve had at least 10 feet of clearance!

[@gospyro]

The CRJ being farther foward would have prevented the accident, but that will make little difference when it comes to who is at fault. It is the responsibility of the plane moving to make sure they are clear and don't hit anything, regardless if they are on the center line or not.

[@naga2015kk]

it was deliberate done to irritate.....nobody does things like that.

[@EmeryE2]

@@naga2015kk?

[@johnwhitmore5408]

"The adrenaline has worn off, I just want to be with my family .." Give me a break, how melodramatic can you get.

[@truthserum5310]

Yup, weak fragile society these days. He'll probably get a Service dog after that incident. SMH.

[@Homedog_]

Good grief so weak and pathetic these days.

[@vintagelady1]

Hindsight is what idiots think you should have known beforehand. I expect most of the passengers thought something awful was happening, just sitting there on the taxiway & suddenly BOOM! But of course big brave unshakeable folks like :truthserum" & "Homedog" wouldn't have been scared, at least not after they changed their pants!

[@truthserum5310]

@@vintagelady1 As a pilot myself, I know what to expect. We are trained to not overreact. The only thing passengers felt was a slight bump. Vertical induced metal shear isn't violent.

[@cowboystormchaser]

My thoughts exactly; that's where I quit watching the video.

[@ColAngus]

There's a new wave of incompetence in every profession.....

[@八極麻花捲]

It’s a no brainer that the small aircraft’s tail is sticking into the intersection. It’s clear that the pilot didn’t move in enough.

[@fastmph]

It’s clear the Delta Captain will likely get a violation over this.

[@ajswiss]

Its a NO brainer that the parked airplane is never in fault of an accident. Yes, they were too short. So, you really think its ok just to crash in it just because they were at the wrong spot? Its always the mistake of the pilot who is in a moving plane. period.

[@amxlopez8082]

@@fastmphI wouldn’t consider it a huge violation for the captain, more like the captain wasn’t sure if the bombardier was far off the taxiway and they weren’t sure if the wing was long enough to smash into the tail of the aircraft but we are not too sure tho who’s to blame. maybe it could have been atc telling the A350 to taxing and lineup tours the runway and thought it was gonna be be fine.

[@ajswiss]

@Kayak_233 so, based on your statement, the pilot has done nothing wrong because he just followed the markings? wow, i hope you are not a pilot. EDIT: it seems, "Kayak" left the chat by deleting his posts. Good decision

[@八極麻花捲]

@@ajswiss you need a new pair of eye glasses! The a380 is moving at center of the route. It’s the parked plane sticking its tail into a380’s path. A380 has every right to move forward.

[@mr.stately9205]

Just goes to show how strong Airliner wings are pretty incredible.

[@yoyojoe9240]

and How "weak" are those Vertical Stabalizers and probably the Horizontal Ones too.

[@xx133]

yeah, these sort of things are always what crops up 10 years later as structural integrity issues leading to a crash

[@tima.478]

@@yoyojoe9240 Vertical stabs are held on with (4) 1 1/4 inch lug bolts. Although it does counter side to side forces (yawing) It is obviously not designed to withstand the lateral forces generated from the direct hit of a large aircraft wing. FYI ✌ (TechOps mechanic)

[@tima.478]

@@xx133 That's why extensive NDT (non destructive testing/x-ray) of the areas supporting the vertical stab mounts, (stringers, ribs, bulkheads, frame stations, fuselage skin etc) will be carried out. AD's (airworthiness directives) will also call out for a more frequent inspection of these affected areas for this particular aircraft, vs. the normal maintenance inspection intervals. ✌(TechOps mechanic)

[@tima.478]

A350 wings can flex from their normal resting position, to beyond 17 feet up to 26 feet of deflection before they reach failure. SO yeah, incredibly strong. For perspective, some of the worst turbulence on record has the wing moving only about 10-12 inches.

[@chriss3246]

This is WORLDS busiest airport. Not just the countries busiest.

[@JasonK1982]

Actually Heathrow airport in London is the worlds busiest

[@codymoe4986]

@JadonK1982....My sources say Atlanta. London makes claim to the busiest "city airport", whatever that means. Try again.

[@DanLe-vr9cj]

​@@JasonK1982 london isnt even in the top three busiest airports in the world

[@xNYCMarc]

@@JasonK1982Heathrow 1,300 takeoffs and landings per day. Atlanta 2,100 takeoffs and landings per day. It’s not even close.

[@tima.478]

@@xNYCMarc Currently we're (Hartsfield) at 205 take off's and arrivals per hour. (TechOps mechanic)

[@ChristopherBurtraw]

IDk whether I find it more concerning that a t-tail assembly was knocked off "so easily", vs impressed and reassured that the A350's wing was tip is so strong it barely flinched. That wing knocked that tail off like it was nothing.

[@joebo9378]

The CRJ is destroyed. Sure you could replace the tail but the amount of force needed to shear the vertical stabilizer like that means the fuselage structure is most likely damaged as well. Keep in mind the only thing keep all that pressure from popping like a balloon is a sheet of metal about as thick as a couple quarters stacked so any minor damage could be disastrous.

[@trhendricks2216]

I agree it would be courting fate to try to put it back in the air. Sad to see an airframe lost, but releived no injuries

[@zachqueen8316]

@@joebo9378 no believe it or not they will replace the empennage I was working for an airline that had an almost identical incident in JFK several years ago to another crj and they replaced the empennage in about 4 months. Then it was struck again by another aircraft and that aircraft is still flying around. The structure below the vertical stabilizer is very strong and the vertical stabilizer in this incident took an almost direct hit which would have done more slicing than twisting. It's completely rebuildable. It's definitely not going to be cheap but aircraft aren't like cars they don't just total them out. The decision to fix them is based on how much money they can make in the future. This particular aircraft is very young for a crj and it's leased by delta not owned so way more incentive to repair. All the information about the aircraft is on the FAA website.

[@Gryper-c3s]

It isn't pressurized high enough to rupture the skin of the aircraft. Aircraft don't blow up from over-pressurization. There is an outflow check valve.

[@LoudPipesSavesLives]

It's scrap, airframe is a total lost....

[@edmoore3910]

I'm glad you don't build planes. Go play marbles or something

[@bobknip]

Most important de-tail at 00:03. Reporter has more details after that.

[@thepilotmaster777]

This texting while driving thing is getting out of hand

[@fv1291]

RJ was blocking the intersection. He had plenty of room to pull up a few meters.

[@pittss2c601]

You may be correct. He was not all the way up to the 'hold short line' although I believe within 10 feet is acceptable.

[@RobertBoiteau]

Doesn’t matter, even in the MD-11 we can see what’s in front of us and we know our clearances, the A350 crew seemed preoccupied with other things rather than what was going on in front of them

[@JamieCameron-Mackintosh-z7c]

You have to remember that the crew of the CRJ have to stop in a position where they can see the hold short line, just the same way that a driver has to stop at a stop line on the road. It would also rather seem prudent to leave a margin of safety to the line to reduce the chance of an unanticipated problem, such as an ineffective parking brake allowing the aircraft to move with the engines at idle, causing an inadvertent runway incursion. However caused a runway incursion is a very serious thing for any pilot to have on their record and so is for intelligent crew to avoid at all costs. Add in the fact that pretty much all aircrew have different seating positions giving them different lines of sight of the line and it's not for anyone else to make a judgement on the position of the CRJ at the moment. The fact of the matter is that the CRJ was stationary and the A350 hit it. Blaming the crew of the CRJ for this is like you ploughing into the back of a car at a red light and blaming the occupants of that vehicle for you not paying attention. The situation here is the same as if the A350 was operatinhg in VFR conditions. It is incumbent on the A350 crew to see and avoid other traffic, something that they clearly utterly failed to do leading to this, when everything is taken into account, multi-billion dollar mess.

[@mijo3642]

Correct, there are times when ATC has to expect you to what you are supposed to do

[@pittss2c601]

I just spoke to a current United Airlines Captain who’s a buddy of mine to obtain his thoughts. He said, “there’s no hard-n-fast number of feet to the hold short line, just common sense. You just need to pull up enough to allow planes to pass behind you”. He also said, “both crews will probably only be required to get remedial training”.

[@guillandanthony711]

It just shows how strong airplanes' wings can be.

[@xNYCMarc]

This same thing happened between two Deltas in Salt Lake not too long ago.

[@thebenjandboc6981]

This better not delay my flight on saturday!! Let me also add that the reporter really needs to learn what catastrophic means. Because that wasnt it

[@Graphics_Card]

We will rebuild!!! :/

[@BillDownhill]

How is losing the vertical and horizontal stabilizer not catastrophic?

[@stevennagley3407]

It’s pretty catastrophic because I’m highly sure the crj is a write off and will be scrapped and the damages on the larger aircraft

[@sotm6078]

@@BillDownhill They were still on the ground dude!!

[@JamieCameron-Mackintosh-z7c]

​​​@@sotm6078 Yes, but it is likely the end for that CRJ as there is no real way for the stress that impact and the empennage being torn away has placed on the airframe of that aircraft to be measured, and I'm sure most watching this video and reading the comments are well aware of what can happen to an overstressed airframe in flight. Can any airline afford to risk having that happen to an aircraft full of paying passengers? Add in the amount of downtime making the repairs would cause, and the costs attached to that and it isn't hard to see that replacing the aircraft and writing off this one, stripping it for spares and recycling what's left is certainly commercially more sensible, and may very well be economically so too. Plus there is the fact that crew won't be exactly queuing up to fly that aircraft after such major damage has been repaired and it has been returned to service as there are many historic cases of aircraft that have suffered major damage being repaired to the standards applicable at the time but then suffering catastrophic failure up the road. That history WILL follow the aircraft so it will be about as popular as an outbreak of genital warts in a nudist colony. Writing it off is the most likely, most sensible option. In which case this absolutely is catastrophic for this aircraft, for the airline's profits for this financial year and maybe for Delta's too, and potentially massively detrimental to their insurance costs for the next maybe decade...

[@bryanpascual3543]

The A350 wingtip is like wolverine’s claws 😂

[@Jameswormsley319]

😮🔥

[@AEM-le7uy]

It happened because that little plane didn't pull up to the threshold line. It stopped 40 ft before where it was supposed to.

[@vito774]

It happened because the A350 ran into the CRJ

[@AEM-le7uy]

@@vito774 Because the CRJ had his azz end in the right of way. Stop in the middle of an intersection and get hit by a right away vehicle and see who's at fault.

[@richwightman3044]

@@AEM-le7uyStill the fault of the 350 no matter what you think of automobiles and stoplights.

[@AEM-le7uy]

@@richwightman3044 what about what I think of primates walking our streets that suddenly can't breathe every time they're caught shoplifting..

[@zaffo757]

Atlanta’s emergency response sounded like a real S-show.

[@PatBuckleyracecar]

Neither plane will be flying for a while.

[@Raptorman0909]

The CRJ was at least 12m and perhaps as much as 20m from the stop line and that left it's tail overhanging the taxiway. The A-350 appears to have been right on the centerline so they can't be at fault unless they proceeded down the taxiway without clearance. I'm not sure why the CRJ stopped short of the stop line by the amount it did, but it's a smaller plane -- a larger plane might have stuck out that much even if it were stopped right at the stop line. Airports like Atlanta are old infrastructure and they are not easily upgraded to deal with the traffic and size of modern commercial planes. The distance separating the runways and taxiways may have been perfect 60 years ago but they are too close for the traffic and size of modern planes. Imagine trying to rebuild the Atlanta airport by increasing the distance between runways and taxiways -- not even remotely viable.

[@sanitman1488]

Regardless if the a350 is on centerline, common sense dictate’s especially if one is a professional pilot to STOP aircraft until the other aircraft is clear off taxiway.. Obvious this wasn’t done and this cockpit crew not realizing their a350 wings are large and clipped CRJ…. DEI crew probably……. Clear day , clear visibility. ‘Are we clear clear on right’? ‘No’ ‘Stopping aircraft’!

[@bartomand3681]

@@sanitman1488 The pilots can not see their wingtips from the cockpit, and have to rely on the professionalism and expectation that other crews are doing their jobs correctly. I am not clearing the crew of the A350 entirely, the FO should have warned the Captain (who most likely was steering the plane on the ground) of the possible infringement, but if the FO was running pre-flight checklists...

[@sotm6078]

@@sanitman1488 Dude ATC ground control is repsonible for ALL ground movement!!!!!!!

[@sotm6078]

@@bartomand3681 The only one who can steer is the left seat.

[@thud9797]

​@@sotm6078 That is company policy at Delta?

[@GeneRoman-f8h]

The CRJ-900 could have pulled forward BUT the 330 should not have continued where its path was clearly blocked. I suppose they will take 9 months to come to the same conclusion.

[@andresmith9212]

Not A 330..... it's an A350-900

[@fredmugo1596]

A350

[@daveluttinen2547]

Mind you the co-pilot cannot see the wingtip of the right wing, so if ATC cleared them to the next taxiway, they were not wrong. BUT why anyone would want to pass that close to a jet pointed perpendicular to the A350 fuselage is question that needs to be answered. 106 feet was about two feet too much, but that CRJ was probably a good 20 feet short of the hold short line. A mess for the crews, a mess for ATC, and a mess for the passengers on both aircraft who likely were making connecting flights at their destination.

[@globalnova]

@@daveluttinen2547 they were wrong. they should have stopped. it's pretty simple.

[@daveluttinen2547]

@@globalnova : I drove big equipment and also have a pilot's license (IFR, aerobatics, and multi hours). I am reticent to blame anyone for a screwup, but my feeling is that if you are not sure of something, STOP until you are sure. I have sat in the pilot seat of an A350 and it is an impressive airplane. You can't see much (wingtips) BUT you have to know where your corners are. Someone in that cockpit should have noticed that the CRJ was not all the way up to the hold short line but it seems they were distracted by another problem and they made assumptions. I'll be following this until the official report comes out.

[@HAL9000-su1mz]

Tell me that Will Smith was not on the A350 and Chris Rock was not on the smaller jet.

[@sevovevo3396]

scary how easy it is to break apart the plane

[@ToyotaGr010]

not easy at all, is just that the A350 is massive heavy jet compared to the CRJ. the MTOW for the a350-900 is 280 (617,300) tonnes, the MTOW for the crj is just 80,000 pounds

[@codymoe4986]

How easy?? You realize how much force was involved in that collision??

[@johnharris7353]

It prob would have broke off anyway sometime!

[@lmars]

Always check your blind spot before merging… 😂 JK glad everyone is ok. 😅

[@ronparrish6666]

South West 737 casually going by well that looks different over there

[@bcgrittner]

KZbinr blancolirio offered an answer to this incident.

Yes, he did. It's definitely the smaller plane at fault here, but who actually gets held accountable we will have to wait and see. They both might take some blame.

[@frankpinmtl]

The RJ was some 40-50ft short of the hold line. Saw that...

[@MKHNitro]

Juan Brown defending negligent A350 crew - if their path wasn't clear they should have just stopped

[@vito774]

You’re wrong

@@vito774 who's wrong?

[@Gryper-c3s]

Why are they "falling out of their seats" when taxiing? They are supposed to have their lap belts on. For these exact types of reasons.

[@Weworkin2012]

There probably doing 15 mph imagine in air at 500mph obliteration!

[@CRJ08]

Brazil 2006

[@KeithApp]

**** THEY'RE ****

[@Weworkin2012]

@@CRJ08 to do bem 🙌🏾

[@TezcatlipocaMountedRailfan]

DHX611 and BAL2937. N600XL and GOL1907. AW706 RED and USMC BuNo.151458. It’s happened, and it’s always devastating.

[@zachqueen8316]

Hard to watch as I have worked on that regional jet many times. Most likely they will put a new empennage on the aircraft and continue flying it as that aircraft isn't very old.

[@SaturnV69]

Every time I get clearance to taxi, I always check for obstacles in my projected path on the taxi way or at any location the aircraft may be positioned on the tarmac. The control tower doesn't have the field of view from the cockpit like the pilots have. There has been an occasion or two when I would have clearance to taxi but then I would need to call the tower to advise them another aircraft is still blocking my path. At large airports with a lot of ground traffic such as ATL, you need to be very alert. Be safe everyone.

[@bartomand3681]

Juan on the Blancolerio KZbin channel did a great job yesterday..it appears that the RJ wasn't pulled up to the Hold Short Line and had its butt sticking out. The A350 appeared to be on the Center Line and should have had the clearance to go by without incident. Will be interesting to see what the NTSB comes out with.

[@thud9797]

They will probably fault the Delta crew for not paying attention to their surroundings and not noticing that the CRJ was too far back, and they'll probably reveal exactly what the FO was doing while they were zipping down the taxiway with another aircraft as a potential conflict. Contributing to the incident was the CRJ being too far back but no blame will be put on them.

[@darrells1806]

While you are on a taxi way moving, you need to be aware of your surroundings regardless of your location. The RJ was stopped. The Delta aircraft was moving therefore they are at fault. If there was any doubt in my mind taxing that aircraft that we would not be able to clear the stopped RJ we would’ve stopped our aircraft as well until the regional jet moved well forward his location. Bottom line is never move your aircraft unless you know it’s clear on both sides of your wings.

[@DrJohn493]

@@thud9797 See and avoid is rule # 1 in the air, weather permitting. Same applies on the airport surface.

[@hothotheat3000]

Imagine making it through the labyrinth that is ATL only to get hit by a plane on the tarmac. Wild stuff.

[@grumpyadventures3843]

The regional aircraft was instructed to pull to the hold line, but they stopped short. That left the tail exposed to larger aircraft circuiting through the taxi way. Pilot error.

[@richwightman3044]

Yep, pilot error by the 350 for hitting a stationary object. There is no mandated distance to be from a hold short line.

[@mattf49006]

The CRJ was about 40 feet shy of being at the hold short line...commenters say the FO on the airbus should have seen it but the FO can't see the wing from his seat...

[@vito774]

Yes you can, reference airbus manual

[@outermarker5801]

This is the world's busiest airport. It can't be the first time a heavy has taxied past an aircraft holding short at that intersection. Something unusual happened here.

[@minthouse6338]

Somebody made a mistake that's for sure.

[@mrAhollandjr]

Today's journalism SUCKS. TWO PLANES DID NOT COLLIDE! That statement implies that BOTH aircraft were MOVING and ran into each other. The fact is ONE plane was holding short of a runway NOT MOVING when another plane was moving on another taxiway and hit the stationary plane. It's that simple

[@iTzChRoNiiC]

That’s not simpler 😂

[@broncoguy4862]

Get out your dictionary and look up the definition of "collide"...you are going to be very disappointed.

[@ralphra4998]

@mrAHollandjr: collide is the fully correct shortest description. Nowhere does the definition of "collide" state both objects must be in full motion.

[@sotm6078]

Still two planes collided!!

[@styldsteel1]

It's just as the reporters falsely report that a bridge in Baltimore Collapsed. How dare they insult the bridge engineers. A container ship slammed into the bridge. The bridge was knocked down. Then of course, everyone and their mother was saying THE BRIDGE COLLAPSED THE BRIDGE COLLAPSED. Once again, failed reporting.

[@Valentin_MeL]

Well, it's pretty hard as a pilot to understand how big your wings actually are during taxi, but A350 has a camera on a tail which allow to see all the wings. So it's a bit strange that they collaided. It's also amazing that a350 didn't took any damage,

[@eco2geek.]

If you want a better explanation of what happened, go watch the video on Blancolirio's channel (he's a professional airline pilot). It appears that the plane that got its tail knocked off wasn't pulled up all the way to the line that's painted on the runway, so the other plane didn't have enough room to get past it.

[@azeddineij6521]

Look how solid that A350 wing

[@willcall9431]

The sad part is ground control knew better but Both pilots will have this in their record.

[@marktrisko8425]

One wonders if the airport taxiways / facilities provide enough room for the largest planes to move around without risk of collisions / fender benders.

[@DrJohn493]

Yes, yes they do. The FAA has very detailed design standards for this category of airport that must be met. The airport engineers do a very good job getting the runway/taxiway configurations designed and constructed to avoid these kinds of incidents.

[@ASDasdSDsadASD-nc7lf]

@@DrJohn493 LOL, you are proven entirely wrong by the video itself. Turn in your Doctor badge immediately, you lack the critical thinking skills to make assessments.

[@sturmovik1274]

@@ASDasdSDsadASD-nc7lf "do a very good job getting... to avoid these kinds of incidents" does not mean that the incidents do not happen. It only means that they happen much less frequently than they otherwise would. By that logic, the fact that highway engineers design roadways to be as safe as possible means that car accidents no longer happen. Also, those design standards are public record. Look them up if you want to.

[@Gryper-c3s]

Absolutely.

[@jefflewis4]

@@ASDasdSDsadASD-nc7lf He's right, the regional Jet was further back from the hold point line which resulted in its rear extending on to the Taxiway. Had it been at the hold point line the A350 would have had more than enough clearance, so the taxiway had enough room for that aircraft.

[@robertmartin3490]

At the time the tail was cut off, I could actually hear a cartoon buzzsaw sound in my head.

[@CuriousMouseExploration]

I've seen two reports on this which clearly shows that the CRJ crew were at fault. The A350 was in the middle of the crossing taxiway as they should have been so that they don't clip anyone on either side of them. The CRJ plane was 56 feet behind the hold short line which put their tail overlapping the crossing taxiway. Pilots need to be reminded they need to pull up to the hold short line so that they clear the crossing taxiways.

[@DaveTweddell]

You can’t blame this on the tower. Pilots on taxiways are supposed to monitor wingtip clearance from other planes. This was all on the pilot taxiing past the RJ.

[@Milesco]

Not necessarily. Yes, it looks to the layperson (which includes me) that this was the A350 pilots fault but other commenters have said that the Bombardier was not parked where it was supposed to be, and was sticking out into the A350's lane of travel. Note that the pilots of the A350 cannot see their own plane's wingtips.

[@cardboard9124]

@@Milesco no, it is the pilot's fault, they didn't see it. Air traffic control doesn't control everything when it comes to taxiing

[@Milesco]

@@cardboard9124 I didn't say anything about Air Traffic Control. All I said was that the collision was not necessarily entirely the A350 pilot's fault, and I noted that the pilot cannot see the wingtips of his own plane.

[@cardboard9124]

@@Milesco they can see the wingtips of their plane, and it is their fault

[@DaveTweddell]

@@Milesco it doesn’t matter if they can see their wingtips. They hit a stationary jet. The 350 pilot is responsible to avoid obstacles, even when they are parked incorrectly. A tower clearance to taxi does not relieve the pilots of the responsibility to clear their path prior to proceeding.

[@SKYREAPER30]

At least nobody is dead.

[@ilikethisnamebetter]

@bobknip Excellent. In this case you don't need to cut to the end to get the cut to the end.

[@beemo9]

That hit looked personal

[@SOPHIAFLYGIRL]

CRJ to the A350: " Well, Exxxcause me"

[@nizamieminov3648]

Seeing that tail stabilizer rip off so easily like a paper plane is kinda scary.

[@cardboard9124]

its being hit by a plane, I think that would happen to most materials

[@Furious321]

2:09 - I'm not sure if he ever heard the outcome of David v. Goliath...

[@fernandorosebush6594]

Delta vs Delta

[@0101-s7v]

Delta crew should have known better. It's like they were thinking they were in a car or something.

[@Al-po2oh]

It’s not a near miss, it’s a near hit. In this case a hit.

[@JayTee2985]

United Airlines: thank god it was not us on the news.

[@FSB75]

@01:46 That angle tells the whole story. The larger plane had asked for some place to "check something out", they were moving past Hotel to hold short of Victor on Echo. EDV5526 on a "line up and wait" failed to clear Echo.

[@richwightman3044]

That still doesn’t absolve delta of the responsibility to not hit stuff.

[@denziiey]

The A350 has a taxi camera are the pilots not paying attention? Seems poor judgement or absent mindedness.

[@CRJ08]

Not just the camera, you have to see outside the window, CRJ was in a wrong position but how do you not see it? It's like crashing with a bad parked car, he was wrong but you crash at it

[@cynvision]

I think camera is pointed at wheels so they can see they don't drive off pavement. Seeing wing isn't normal from cockpit. They motor down that yellow center line and expect it to go well.

[@fredsalter1915]

@@CRJ08 Completely agree with you. Generally, it's the vehicle that's moving that is culpable in a collision.

[@denziiey]

@cynvision there's a nose wheel camera and also one pointed at the wings so it's strange they didn't pick that up.

[@paulvonauth7254]

the smaller planed "stopped short" per instructions, but to short...

[@thud9797]

The requirement is to hold short which he did, don't believe there is a requirement to pull right up to the line.

[@mijo3642]

yes

[@truthserum5310]

too*

[@miguelmontano9368]

Cameras could be installed for the pilots to see the parts of the aircraft that they cannot see while taxiing...

[@frankblangeard8865]

Did the larger plane not incur any damage? Seems like a wingtip would be more fragile than a tailfin.

[@thitiwat.r]

I’m so happy that the reporter said “taxiway” instead of “tarmac”.

[@Milesco]

No need for such pedantry. There's nothing wrong with using the word "tarmac" to refer to any paved surface for airplane use other than the runway itself. It's a very common usage, and it conveys the concept succinctly. Thus, it succeeds at its intended linguistic purpose and need not be deprecated.

[@thitiwat.r]

@@Milesco I know that. But “taxiway” is the correct aviation term and I like it.

[@thaiexodus2916]

Embraer held short over 40 feet from the hold short line, measured. 350 has a very wide wing span. Closer adherence to ground traffic compliance is required.

[@ohioexpax1592]

That's not an Embraer. It's a Canadair.

[@thaiexodus2916]

@@ohioexpax1592 Excuse, Bombardier.

[@garyb2392]

Tom Costello looks like Urban Meyer!

[@DearGulley]

Luckily no one was hurt but I’m not surprised it happened. A few month ago I was flying from ATL. Was recording some runway activity for a little vlog I was making and caught 2 planes going towards each other. They never crashed but it’s just a little too close for comfort. It’s one of the busiest airports in the US but timing and space may need to be considered a bit more 😬

[@YTPartyTonight]

Terrible situational awareness.

[@CanadianDrifter777]

Ultimately, it’s the pilot on the big plane that hit the small plane who’s at fault. Oops!

[@elbela74]

Ya no caben los aviones en Atlanta

[@chrisb.2028]

Not sure if collide is the right word but honestly I can't think of a more appropriate word

[@francoisduplessis9468]

The smaller plane stopped too far from the holding point/stop sign...

[@trentgilliam5192]

Looks like the CRJ stopped about 40-50 feet too far back.

[@chipm2544]

Aircrew are charged with not running into things. Say the role was reversed and it was the A350 holding short with tail hanging out, another plane should not taxi into another plane. Almost like big, long pickup trucks pulling through a parking space, not pulling up all the way & their rear end hanging over the parking space behind them.

[@keithlewis4250]

They need someone on the ground to direct triffic. Not just in the tower.

[@zachqueen8316]

@@keithlewis4250 yeah good luck with that. It's just not possible because of the danger. Out that far most aircraft are above idle as it takes more thrust than just idle to keep them moving. They would likely become fond if they were out there directing traffic.

[@JacobTJ1]

what kind of a bind crew was operating that big jet?

[@skimmer8774]

The captain will be lucky to get a job driving taxi.

[@crypto_que]

Did the larger aircraft just takeoff or was there a thorough inspection?

[@zachqueen8316]

@@crypto_que no the A350 would not have been allowed to take off. There would have been an investigation which would require statements from all 4 or 6 pilot depending on where the A350 was going as well as the damage to the leading edge of the A350s wing would require repairs. Most likely a new leading edge and anti-icing ducts at minimum probably even more damage possible. Depending on what point along the leading edge it actually hit. However both aircraft are very repairable.

[@rafaeldelafuente4787]

That sounds expensive...

[@fin3125]

That guy is no expert. I doubt they would scrap the plane

[@LEOretired]

The smaller plane did not fully pull up to hold short bars and left its tail stuck out into the taxiway.

[@richwightman3044]

So? What’s the “required” distance?

[@aaronchandler2380]

Them delta pilots are so glad they’re union members…

[@Perich29]

Skylar: where did you learn to fly?

[@vboytan]

At least the planes share a common owner lol

[@truthserum5310]

They don't actually. The CRJ is not Delta owned.

[@vito774]

@@truthserum5310delta owns that regional

[@nathrebs9107]

its the Air Traffic Controller's fault.

[@southpark5555]

That will buff out.

[@jackbender4885]

“You hit a WHAT?”

[@dbcrn859]

The regional jet was holding too far behind the hold short line. Having said that, the Airbus crew wasn't observant enough to see they were going to collide with the regional. Not ATCs fault.

[@neilwilson5785]

Taxiways are more dangerous than runways. There are loads of times when pilots can't see everything. In North America, the intensity of traffic is obviously too high, but hey.

[@basukisugito8929]

They really don't have a clue how wide the planes is`? Couldn't he see the smaller plane was to close? Pure stupidity

[@zachscott4867]

Held too short. The Airbus is huge and needs all that space. CMJ needed to be 20ft further fwd.

[@truthserum5310]

No such thing as a CMJ.

[@kittycorner8526]

There is no evidence that Dominion Software played a role in this mishap.

[@mrdcato]

On a positive note, that says alot for the strength of the wings. Knocked the tail off another plane and didn't even scratch the wing.😳

[@knightofwind2929]

the wing was damaged, there is another video from a passenger inside shows a big chip off the wing

[@julianopificius6910]

@@knightofwind2929 I've read all the comments to this point, and I STILL haven't heard anybody say "that's gonna a mark!"

[@anonone8954]

Someone wasn't paying attention.

[@GH-oi2jf]

Both airplane crews miscalculated.

[@rearspeaker6364]

doubt if the plane rattled, more like shaking and rattling.

[@easydrive3662]

It would appear its the fault of the RJ as it was well back from the stop line, if further forwards this would not of occured

[@vito774]

A350’s fault

[@TheTirado2]

That airport is chaos! Was there recently

[@TheChibiGingi]

Bruh, and here I thought hitting the curb in my Camry was bad 😢

[@kelly2631]

If you look on google maps the distance from the hold bar to the centerline of the intersecting taxiway is roughly 270 feet. The CRJ900 has a length of 119 feet, and the A350-900 has a wingspan of 212 feet. If the A350-900 was perfectly on the taxiway centerline and the CRJ was right up against the hold bar, then there would be a 45 foot gap between the tip of the A350's wing and the tip of the CRJ-900's tail. I'm not gonna throw blame anywhere since that's for the investigators to do, these are just the numbers.

[@vito774]

I’ll make it easy for you, A350’s fault. Can’t just run into things while taxiing