Printable View
N529JB is sitting just off of runway 31R surrounded by many emergency vehicles.
Can't tell what happened, but it looks like it was an empty plane and maybe was being taxied away to beat the storm and the tug jacknifed under the aircraft, as I saw what looked like a backwards tug underneath the belly while hooked up to the wheel. I could be very wrong on that guess though.
Anyone hear anything?
Well it was bluetug 1... and we weren't trying to beat the WX.. we do daily repositions from the gates to either HG 81 or parcel Zulu.. and we were in the process of moving an a/c.. and with the port authority and there infamous wisdom spraying glycol all over the place.. the tug spun out and ruined the nose gear and possibly the fuselage.. today is my day off.. so im just relaying this back from an E-Mail
Hmm, sounds almost identical to the NW Dc-9 incident with the TUG, Hope we can see some pictures soon!
Was the tug driver hurt? It seems as though the seat of the tug was wedged underneath.
Was just on Fox 5 news.
Still can't find ANYTHING online about this, but an early report from 1st Responder Wireless said the tug driver was injured.
ive been looking online.. i havent heard or recieved any emails about this yet, from my supervisor or manager.. but will let people know... the bad thing about that tractor (douglas tbl 280) is that w/ an a/c behind it.. it becomes very easy to loose control.. but over all the thing is a dream to drive.. but will share any posts i get and or pics..
and with the port authority and there infamous wisdom spraying glycol all over the place.. the tug spun out and ruined the nose gear and possibly the fuselage
Something about this statement bothers me. The PA, in their 'infinite wisdom" should assume blame for your tug (that you describe is easy to lose control of) spinning out of control? Or should the uncareful driver assume the blame? I hope the injuries are minor and he has a quick recovery.
If it were the fault of the PA, "in their infinite wisdom", then we should all be reading about a massive pile up of tugs spinning out of control at JFK. :roll: C'mon now. I think the tug driver should have been more careful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrodie
i've got to agree. port deices taxiways every year. towing and pushing airplanes in winter is definately different than an august blue-sky day. while i can't pass judegment, i think it be better to look at the driver's driving as a main cause of this incident rather than the port's glycol application.
Driving on the ramp is a MUCH bigger challenge than in other weather, and very different from being on a public road.
When on the ramp, you're supposed to stay within certain lines painted on the ground, which you can't see even when there's a dusting. Ice patches pop up and you can easily slide into an parked aircraft, or one that's moving.
You also need to drive a lot slower than the already existing slow limits of 10 or 20 mph.
When I look at this incident, I can't say I can blame either ramper or Port's glycol spraying. At that part of the taxiway, it slopes a little, and even the most skilled driver can slip or slide when going even 2mph, and get spun around when there's the momentum of so much weight that you're pulling.
Just one of the unfortunate things that happen at no one's fault.
see the thing is... taxiing on the ramp is a new thing at JFK.. jet blue was the first here to do it.. and besides American with there goldhofer, are the only airline to actually use the tug on the active taxiways, so pretty much everyone here is brand new at it.. i can pretty much assure you that the people driving our tug that night weren't doing anything stupid or speeding, we hear to much from our manager about safety issues, and things that happened when he was at CO, and if we mess up our jobs are on the line and we are going back to the ramp just about every night. Since this is the first winter for us here, none of us were sure of how it would react, its an unfortunate accident and glad none of my coworkers were seriously hurt, but its just bad we had to learn this way
And I am not blaming those people either. But I am suggesting that perhaps you should your judgement as you were too quick to suggest blame aimed at the PA 8)Quote:
Originally Posted by h2opunk1822
Lucky to have the day off though!
What exactly do you mean by taxiing on the ramp? If you mean, using a tug to tow an aircraft on active taxiways/runway, trust me, jetblue is not the first to do it at JFK and certainly not a new thing. If you mean an aircraft taxiing on it's own on the ramp (inside of active taxiways/runways, that's certainly nothing new either. just curious....can't figure out what you mean, maybe it's just me (and it being late)Quote:
Originally Posted by h2opunk1822
Mike
mike, i think he was referring to the towbarless tug they were using. but towing an airplane on actives isn't new, and it's been going on for long since i was in aviation...
So he's strictly referring to hi-speed tugs? Ah, should have just said that :)
Mike
yea.. i was refering to the high speed tugs, i know using tugs isnt a new procdure here but using high speed tugs is... as for the glycol, on the taxiway.. this winter was the first time the port was trying to use this method, and admitted to us afetr the incident that this was a test procedure.. ill see if i can get some of the pics, we have a few
We didn't need high speed tugs back when. The mx guy would just throttle up all 4 engines on the dc-8 and blast our way from the cargo area to (old) T1 :)
Mike
haha that is true.. but fuel was also alot cheaper! we save alot of money running these tractors then burning the fuel on the engines and using there run up time!.. and dotn forget.. jetblue is all about return to profitability.. so anyway to save a buck... and not screw up like they did last night!
8ACMLK2WOj0
the only video i can find on the internet.. im still waiting to see if the sup will send me the pics that they took[/url]