The problem is there’s limited crossing points while managers demand you be on time. Safety isn’t followed from the top down this incident happens constantly because of pressure to be on time.
Hopefully it will be shown to shiny new managers who think they can polish their horn by harassing workers reporting to them to work to unsafe speeds. What if it had been the worker who got pushed into the engine?
Absolutely true. I've had a lot of hot bags in my carts where I had to wait 5-10 minutes or more waiting to cross. I've had to double back and take the other service road along the Southern edge of T5 to get across. Takes longer, but it's less of a bottleneck over there and it's safer than attempting what's in the video.
@@sunshineflyer managers don't care, they'll back off for a week and then it'll be back to business-as-usual screaming at employees to get the cargo out on time.
I keep hearing that he's a stellar employee and that this was a bad mistake. This looks like a lot more than a bad mistake to me. I don't know the guy, I cant speak for the rest of his work, but this is really bad. If I made a mistake like this, I'd expect to deal with the consequences of my actions.
@@ChicagoAirportSpotter Id say it was a Bad, Expensive Mistake. But still a mistake nonetheless. I’m sure he had the “Oh #$*%” moment we all would’ve had when he heard those engines spool up on the Air France, and saw those containers skidding towards the American Plane. I agree hopefully he owns up to it and learns from the mistake. Now, whether thats with his current employer, or someone else, completely depends on his attitude.
@@67EndgameI worked on the assembly floor at P&WA a couple years in the late 1970s. Even then JT-9s were close to $2million. The paperwork for each engine was crazy. We used to kid around that when the weight of the paper equaled the weight of the engine the engine was done.
Dad is a retired Pratt jet engineer - He said there is no way in hell that engine will be rebuild - the inspection of every part from the imaging , dyes , measuring weighing would cost more than a new engine - It’s also an insurance loss so the company is happy to repair the structure on the aircraft and slap a new engine on
@@car2069it will get torn down at an MRO but no part of that engine will ever fly again unless it’s as a new product made from the recycled metals. No insurance company would allow it. No airline would install it. The liability should a crash occur with such parts in an aircraft would be insane and no one will take that liability on. Further, every individual rotating part would have to be inspected to the maximum degree possible even to consider what might be salvageable. Nope, that puppy is a scrap heap bound for the recycling furnaces.
I`m an ex- air traffic controler, and when I was in the active duty, no vehicule,whatsoever was allowed to cross taxyways, or move around taxiing aircraft without permission.
the airport i work at requires at least two aircraft lengths in either direction in order to proceed and cross. what on earth is that person doing crossing right behind an aircraft. If that's an accepted policy of the airport then thats insane
Yeah, its standard to have restricted areas around running acft engines. An ingestion zone in front of the acft engines and a blast zone behind the engines. That tug should have been prohibited from going behind the front one, with the exception of a taxi control specifically directing both the acft and the tug for that maneuver so the acft would know not to throttle up. The other thing is ground equipment being required to cross both taxi ways in one move. Thats moronic. Looking at the overhead view at 7:00 it appears that they could move the taxi lines farther apart from each other and make that center median crossing a required stop instead of a forced kamikaze.
Good briefing on the luggage carts. Flew the 787 for my last 5 years. I saw another reader mentioned 20 million for one Pratt. The price for these aircraft (787-8) is just a little over 200 million. The 787-9 is over 240 million, and the 787-10 just under 300 million. The OP mentioned he drives a fair amount at ORD. At least from my experience, ground handlers in O’Hare are pretty good about safe driving on the tarmac, as in not usually cutting us off as we were taxiing. There definitely have been countless ‘incidents’ at other airports (never at any of our international destinations….only in U.S. airports) where I had to slow or even stop the aircraft while a baggage handler crosses right in front of us, sometimes the driver not even looking. Just surprised this doesn’t happen more often.
I was a ramp controller for a few years, I took a lot of calls from pilots giving me the company name and vehicle number of vehicles that cut them off. And by "a lot" I mean 10-15 over 4-5 years. 1 is a lot, tbh. I followed up on every single one because I didn't want that idiocy on my ramp. I remember one time I sheepishly slowed to a halt by the F Alley, and an RJ pilot waved me through. I looked around me, saw that everything was good, and I scooted across in front of him, gave him a thumbs-up, and immediately got pulled over by airport security 🤣 He let me go, though.
@@ChicagoAirportSpotter Always like to read about that type of story. Never was based in ORD, except for a month back in the mid 80s. Actually one of the best airports, excellent ATC, operations, as well as the city itself. Never visited any Ramp Controller, but did a tour of our OPs in SFO as I had a friend working there. Anyways, I just remembered that I need to subscribe to your channel. Retirement is fun every single day, but I still remain interested in Safety, CRM, etc.
If that service road is that heavily travelled on a daily basis, they really need a tunnel. As for the video: thank you for posting and explaining. I have just 2 comments for improvement : about 3;40 you are talking about damage to the engine but the visual is still the container graphic. And at 5:06-5:35 a highlighter or arrow or something would have been helpful for the viewer. It's not a diagram most are familiar with and it seemed very detailed. BUT THANK YOU! It's a great vid and great explanation of the situation.
You mean the "depressed roadway" that parallels the tram tracks? That's still there, but most people don't know about that road. I myself didn't know about that road until a few years into my airport career.
You may be surprised that the CDA for YEARS has had ZERO concept of how to design and implement the “new” ORD. This bottleneck here is the result of a complete lack of knowledge of how airport traffic should be managed and routed. Until they get off their collective A$$es and build two “end around” taxiways at the west end of 28R and 27L this issue will remain.
Wow! I never thought something like that would happen. Thanks for a very well presented video and analysis. Glad no one was hurt but I bet the driver won’t be working there anymore.
Great video, Chicago Airport Spotter. I thought it was going to be a fake because the “goods” were over two minutes in but I was pleasantly surprised. And your knowledge about the incident is a bonus. Keep up the good work.
Kindly pardon if this has already been mentioned but the AKEs on those dollies, although light in comparison to others, would NOT have become free if the locks had been properly secured. This is one of those safety violations that everyone ignores until something like THIS occurs then everyone claims they would never allow it to take place. I saw it take place countless times at MEM (FedEx) and have no doubt it takes place at every other airport unless it’s noted that SAFETY is in the area. More so civilian than military. That’s simply fact. The equipment used for these containers (cans) hasn’t changed for decades and until forced to do so will remain as it current is. Solar powered LEDs (red/green) connected to proximity switches would literally cost less than $5 per dolly but who wants to do that when you could simply buy a $30 million engine every once in a while.🙄 Whatever saves money is inevitably what gets approved and in this case NOTHING is the cheapest option. They’ll blame the tug driver because, according to protocol, THEY were the one responsible. As long as the large corporations have a SOP they can point to and place the blame on an individual, as opposed to their SOP itself (which functions more efficiently when the SOP is NOT followed), they will sit back and say “Not our fault”.
A&P currently doing heavy checks on 737s here. Most likely the majority of the debris when through the bypass duct. Many of those front fan blades look ok from those pictures. It's possible most of the compressor and turbine stages are ok. Mechanics can swap this engine and inspect the pylon in 24 hours if theyre properly equiped at this airport. You'll need a new intake to bolt onto the new engine. The engine will go back to the manufacturer and get a complete overhaul. Most likely it will just need a lot of new blades. The shafts, cases, accessories, etc are probably all fine. It takes a lot to make an engine not worth salavaging at all. Edit: someone below says his dad is a Pratt and Whitney engineer and he says it will be scrapped. If a P&W guy says it then I would defer to him, although engineers don't always know how maintenance really gets handled so it depends on their exact role. If they really do have to do crack inspections on every single part then I could see them scraping it, but I think it would be worth it to use any good parts as spares.
I agree accessories, and various parts will be salvageable, probably even undamaged and after inspection will be put into the spares bin, but I have my doubts that the engine core is at all repairable. I have no doubt a few pounds of metal passed through the hot section and centrifugal forces of anything that temporarily hung up on a fan or turbine blade would be flung out from the disk along with likely some broken off blades and impacted all along the inner walls of the core sections. Some probably jammed up as well putting torque that would likely bring shafts out of true, but they are pretty beefy so possibly that is one part inside the core that can be reused along with some injectors, but I think the rest would be too far gone since the disks, blades, and stator vanes were pitted, bent or scratched if not broken. I am not an engine mechanic but knowing how much damage a large bird can do (at 10 lbs or so) and birds being quite a bit softer and lighter than aluminum box that engine swallowed there is no doubt it was catastrophically damaged. I would bet that engine core and 90% of what is inside it is done. If I am not mistaken the guys helmet that went into an engine when he got sucked into the intake of an A-6 intruder destroyed that engine as well, and that helmet is just a few pounds of fiberglass and plastic. Granted the Dreamliner engine appeared to only be running at ground idle (since it was stationary on the tarmac) and since the Intruder was preparing for a cat shot it may have have been running up or at full power, which would make a difference but I don't remember and it may have also could have been getting hooked up and only at idle and engine RPM would certainly be a factor in the damage on both incidents.
I second your comment! Engineer thinks one way, mechanic thinks another, there's hope in that being overhauled. Also, from a lessor's or owner's standpoint, I don't think they would want to write that as a total loss.
I worked in certification at GE for a couple of decades until recently retiring. A bag of bolts that can fit in your pocket can trash an engine. (So don't leave a bag of bolts anywhere near the intake when the engine is on the test stand.) Yeah, there will be salvageable parts, but in today's world, they'll discard anything even a little "iffy".
@@UncleKennysPlace fair point. We actually had a few screws get sucked in at our maintenance facility recently, but it just needed some inlet repairs and a few new fan blades. The core was fine, thankfully. I assume they boroscoped every stage. It was on a 757.
Looking at this incident from a safety/risk accessment perspective there is usually multiple factors that when crossed especially in aviation that can lead to an accident/incident. # 1 as stated in comments there was a lack for situational awareness . Crossing behind a heavy is a recipe for disaster. There is enough jet blast to send everything including the containers flying. Most LD3 transports that i have seen do have some slack with the clamps to hold down the containers and with jet blast from a heavy i believe it is beyond what those to clamps are designed / intended to hold. # 2 haste to meet a deadline for baggage perfomance goal may be a factor as others have mentioned , compeling the driver to take a risk that is not safe nor recommended. # 3 maybe there is an issue with the layout and design of the airport around that and other issues compelling individuals to take risks that are not safe. On the map shown that area is a known hot spot. I am surprised there is a surface road crossing a movement area / taxiway. Are there tunnels there that can help to minimize / prevent taxiway incursions and provide a safe path to cross underneath. Where i work there are tunnels to cross underneath taxiways so aircraft and ramp traffic are separate near movement areas. Maybe this incident can lead to a redesign of the areas there to control the risk associated with the taxiway crossing there and some eduation in situational awareness training to prevent the multiple factors from coelesing into another incident in that area
I remember when the containers had doors/curtains on both sides and they would drive them around with Both sides fully open (when empty) to help prevent this from happening..... (i.e. extremely high resistance to jet (and propeller) blast!) AND Thank You for the quick explanation .vs. a 15 to 25 minute explanation!!!
I’ve never understood people taking those kinds of risks driving around aircraft. My philosophy was always hey, if I’m stuck waiting because of a plane, too bad. You can’t win going up against an airplane.
Well done, it’s not often we see a catastrophic incident such as this. It could have been much worse with the debris flying around like that, you’ve done a pretty good job explaining some of the details👍
I think people are VASLY underrating the possibility that the locks were either inop or (more likely) not fully engaged on the dollies. Considering the containers were all empty, I think it is highly likely that there was a slippage of safety standards (based on my own time on the ramp). Also notice that the AKE on Tug 1 is not closed, and the bulk cart on cart 2 are not closed.
Thanks for the detailed account info of the incident. Few years back at O'Hare during a blizzard, a China Airlines Cargo Queen injested a luggage cart!
That plane was way offline during almost zero visibility whiteout conditions and plowed into staged AA cargo containers. The damaged engine was swapped out and it was on its way about a week later.
I was in air plane not long ago where they literally locked up the wheels while taxiing because a food services truck CUT OFF the aircraft! They need to be a little bit better about who they're hiring.
Well done, this was very interesting to review. Modern airports seem to be busy beyond the point where the traffic therein can be operated without incident. Recently there was a collision between 2 jets on the ground while taxi-ing prior to departure. I’m constantly hearing about substandard performance on the part of ATC’s and ground controllers. Now being on the ground as well as in the air will cause nervous fliers more grief, moving forward…
To correct you a little. Yes, the fan blades will have to be changed. But the entire engine will have to be torn down and entirely rebuilt. FOD can have entered every part of the engine. After a complete inspection it will have to be balance checked and re-balanced from turbine blades forwards. Just imagine if one of the three central shafts were bent or even slightly unbalanced. Only one way to determine: tear it down to the last nut, bolt and retaining wire. Neither GE or R-R will stand behind anything less.
@@justincaldarella Definitely. I was just looking at it from an engineers perspective. It's an insurance write off and will be parted out. Still has a couple million $$$ in parts. The way things are going at Boeing the cowling may be gracing one of their upcoming trash piles.
@@elevatorcentralit was an American tug, dollies, and Iberia AKE containers. They're lucky in the sense that it all happened "in-house," so to speak, and can be handled internally between the airline and their own insurance.
Working at O’Hare 30+ years, I’ve personally seen many situations (aircraft strikes, Mother Nature, vehicle accidents, etc..) Even after years of experience, it’s a dangerous situation driving around the airfield but many incidents are avoidable.
If the ramp is unionized, there is a fair chance for correction. If they are on temporary contracts, they would be subject to the wimp of hurried up management. Fortunately this time is only containers and an engine, no sucky human fresh.
Well done. A little wordy, IMO, but well done. Most will not recognize that the A350 blew the containers off with 100+ mph jet blast, as at the point where the containers are flying the A350 has begun to move forward. Break away thrust can be 150 mph. Maybe more. It is for this reason we never ask pilots of large, heavy jets to “expedite” or “taxi without delay.” People have died in similar situations here at ORD as a result.
Definitely a little wordy - I did this off the top of my head without a script. If I do another one of these, I'm changing that. I had so many people asking me what happened that I got tired of typing it out, so I made a video to explain it to them and then decided to upload said video 😆 And thank you for the additional info. When I was a ramp controller, I often used the phrase "minimum breakaway thrust" on the frequency when guiding departing aircraft out off the ramp because we had so much activity behind them, we had to take every possible precaution to deal with the horrible layout of the Lima Alley.
Betrayed by the ceiling 🦗 literally started beeping as soon as I started recording this. All is well, a new 9V battery has been procured and installed 😆
lmao i was on that flight, lefthand side on a wing seat, it was a layover for me in chicago from london, i connected to this flight from madrid, its surreal seeing a plane i was in on camera on social media
For once someone that knows what they are talking about.... those containers have 2 sets of locks. 1 locks the container on the dolly to keep moving side to side... the other one keeps the container from being blown off (When these locks are spring loaded so no one really checks them.
It was more an issue of the jet blast of the Air France plane causing the problem than anything else. Plus- those containers were NOT secured to the carts in any way- the carts didn't even tip, the containers blew right off.
Yes something was wrong with the dolly's the locks should of been able to hold them. If the locks are not set the cans would of fell off at his first turn. I would say he used the wrong dolly's for the equipment he was using.
The tug driver should start playing Corn Hole, horseshoes or mini golf. Seriously, how many times a day does a tug driver with carts do just this task? Countless. Policy changes coming now and more miss connection for luggage. This may fall under a condition called Normalization of Deviance.
I lived in Chicago for 35 years. EVERY time I flew out of or into O'Hare, my suitcase was damaged, broken plastics, unnecessary scuffs and stains, beat up. They don't give a shit, at all. They walk around smugly like they own the place. The least they could do is the act like they care. In this video the oblivious driver doesn't know they have empties?
Any report of damage to any aircraft behind the 787? Specifically the biz jet immediately behind the 787. Kinda looked like one of the bins was heading their direction. It’s a helpless feeling to be stuck in place on a taxiway & watch fod like that heading towards you!
As an ORD airport employee myself, I witnessed an American Airlines employees lose 4 of these containers in the wind less than a week before this incident. I am not sure if it is an issue with their dollies (the platforms with wheels that you load the containers on) as they look incredibly cheap and flimsy compared to other airlines' equipment or if it is simply negligence from employees refusing to make sure their load is secured. Either way, that driver shouldn't have crossed the double taxiway with the A350 right there as you're supposed to give extra room to widebody aircraft to accomodate their massive engines and the crazy thrust they make even at idle power.
How is it that ORD ramp workers or aircraft/airline employees have special access to locations on airport property, between runways, at runway thresholds, etc. that the typical taxpayer and patron of the airport don't have access to, for plane spotting, YT channel content creation, etc? No one wants to answer the basic question about how a person can watch aircraft operations when we can't even park out on Irving Park Road or Mannheim Road to watch aircraft operations from a great distance? Does the ATC/FAA Tower folk approve of such dangerous filming locations? Are they even consulted? It's one thing to have a camera stationed on the roof of an adjacent business across the street from Midway Airport to capture runway and ramp action, but this stuff at O'Hare is over the top. Contrary to other large cities and their airports, the City of Chicago would rather prosecute aviation hobbyists than provide a safe parking area to view airport action.
@@RichardCurry-z1e I wouldn't know much about that, sorry. If I ever do record anything, I will film it from the ramp itself. I am not familiar with prosecution of aviation hobbyists taking photos/videos of air traffic or the random film locations that other employees may use.
@@RichardCurry-z1e Also I'd like to add that my airline does not allow us to cross any sort of taxiway or runway. We are only allowed to use the service roads but I can't speak for other categories of employees here.
@@malps420 Appreciate your airline rule adherence, but the tug in this video was on a so called service road that crossed a live taxiway. You can do damage by driving poorly right on the ramp, let alone the service roads, many of which are under grade level, tunneled, etc. Why aren't ramp drivers patched in to the ATC ground control frequencies so they can be guided by the people upstairs in the towers? Who is to blame for the bad decisions involved in the incident here?
@@RichardCurry-z1e Yes, I will acknowledge that this was one of the rare taxiway crossings for the service roads that we drive on. I don't think that it is necessary to be guided by the controllers upstairs as all employees are required to give way or give priority to aircraft taxiing. In this instance, there were several factors to cause this result and a lot of it is still speculation because not all the details have came out yet. Firstly, we have no idea if the containers themselves were properly secured on the dollies. My airlines' dollies are very secure and even wind wouldn't have been able to knock them off if that was the case. Secondly, there was another heavy aircraft in front of the taxiway that the tractor was driving through. In my opinion, I don't think that he should've crossed the taxiway while being sandwiched between two widebodies as we are supposed to give MUCH more space to widebodies as their engines are significantly larger and produce much more jet blast than your typical 737. If the containers were secured, this could be blamed on the airline's use of unsafe equipment that obviously fail easily, but there's a chance that it could've also been employee negligence if they were not secured. Hope this helps!
Question: say the AA pilot had been very attentive and seen first container start to be blown off the cart and pressed the big red buttom "emergency engine stop" (f such exists). Would it have made any difference to engine damage? I know engines take forever to stop spinning, but curious if it is a logarithmic curve where thrust drops very fast, followed by long spin down without appreciable thrust, or whether it is more linear.
wasn't in the cockpit, so that's my first alibi ... but they were about to start moving again because AF ahead was starting ... so clearly there should have been a higher level of awareness prior to resuming taxi than when they were stopped. ... I've thought the same thing, though. The fan wouldn't be stopped, but I think it wouldn't have sucked the container into the inlet. The container would probably have still struck the cowl. The damage isn't on the pilot(s) but it seems, if the video segment plays in real time, the speed of the fan could have been reduced to avoid ingestion. Taxing, especially at ORD, is one of the most challenging/threatening parts of the job. I've done it for AA since '98.
An 9 hour engine swap she'll be back in action luckily it's a maintenance hub for American they have the ability to swap engines at O'Hare if they have it on hand ...-former Aviation Systems Tech based at O'Hare for American
Excellent video! WOW! You could Really see all that happened! One quick ?, why wasn’t the driver sucked in too? Or are these things remotely operated? In any event, awesome job with the video! 😊
@theunknowntxter1873 the driver was in the tug, which protected him. He got lucky. It also appears the Air France A350 just happened to add power just as or after the tug had cleared its engines, but the empty AKEs weren't so lucky.
The engine will undoubtably undergo a full rebuild. Q : Are those luggage containers ever tied down to the cart, or are they just placed without any tiedown straps / securing locks ?
Worked for a PHX based airline in late 80’s, early 90’s. This type of thing happens regularly, conx bags sitting on a belt loader parked too close to the ingestion zone and all kinds of other FOD. Worst was the metal coupler on the end of the hose of an A/C cart that destroyed the #2 engine on a 757 while taxing up the j-line.
Imagine sitting in a right window seat and seeing that large piece coming over the wing @ 5:00 and smacking against a few windows further back. Maybe it wasn't metal but the size of that piece would make it seem your number is suddenly up while stationary on a taxiway.
We was sitting in row 16 by the window, I saw the engine shake and make a lot if noise, then something came flying out and hit our window. Made a bit of noise and did startle passengers around us. The window was marked - we made sure the crew were aware of that when we alighted some 70 minutes later.
@@GordonSkinner Very interesting. Thank you both. I guess it was gone before any panic could set in. The crew up front shut the engine down promptly. I wondered if they announced anything or came back to look out. A mark on the window as well. Stay safe. I hope your journey wasn't badly affected other than the 3 hour delay etc.
Excellent and very informative video; thanks very much. Amazing and frightening how strong those engines are - how much ‘suck’ they have! Thanks very much indeed for sharing.
@jimonthecoast3234 Yeah, just got cut off during the camera pass. It happens. I use Google Maps a lot for work and often notice buses, trucks, trains, airplanes, and ships cut off. Most of the Google Maps aerial imagery over populated areas is done from prop planes, not really by satellite.
Is there a specific reason the AKEs aren't secured to the trailer while in tow to prevent this situation? At least they would stay attached to the tug and trailers in this kind of situation.
jet engines, and many other things that produce huge amounts of energy (relative to myself) give me an almost primordial sense of fear. like..."do not go near that thing."
Difference between narrow body and wide body - the tug driver MIGHT have gotten away if it was a A320, but a Heavy is a huge NO NO to go behind even at idle thrust - ESP with empty LD4s
One problem here is that for crossing ground traffic the holding points are not at save positions. It should not happen that the distance of stopped planes to crossing vehicles is within jet blast range.
Many years ago, I spent a night in a terminal at O'Hare between flights, and was entertained by a homeless gentleman telling his life story. He said he was homeless because unemployed, and unemployed because of a ramp incident. Apparently an 11 year veteran of working the ramp, he noticed a serious safety violation near a plane he was not responsible for, and urgently pointed it out. He was canned for not paying attention to his own plane, and the person in charge of the other plane's ramp crew was defensive of his own authority. Anyway, something did happen, and they had to pull that plane for inspection. I don't know how much of that to believe, but it seems possible .
Are there any requirements for basic intelligence to work at O'Hare? Or are there no consequences for stupidity in Chicago? My only time to arrive/depart Chicago was interrupted by an idiot ground staff that pulled the emergency slide right before we were supposed to board. I thought it was a one-off thing but apparently it wasn't.
@feoxorus lmao, I spend a great deal of time questioning the intelligence of some of the people I work with. I'm not perfect, but DAMN! Some people have really done some dumb shit in my time here. A gate agent I was once dating was almost killed by an emergency slide deploying into the jetway. Flight attendant (ORD-based, of course) forgot to disarm it before opening the door. My girlfriend had JUST moved out of the way and back into the jetbridge driver's cab to check her phone when the slide shot right past her. Lucky girl, that one.
This may sound stupid to ya’ll, but why can’t there be a grid aka screening at the fan inlet ? I mean why would it hinder the airflow so much ? Like 2” x 2” animal type mesh or something.
The engine compressor blades are a much smaller diameter than the fan you see. I suspect most of the debris shot out around the engine, not thru it. The nose cowl suffered a lot of damage but I'm sure the engine can be rebuilt.
Engine is junk. Everything got ruined. Small bits got into the core and good lucky cleaning that up. You can’t rebuild a damaged jet engine, it’s not that simple as you obviously think.
@@Roboseal2 obviously the fan is scrap, but the core can be rebuilt depending on severity and extent of damage. The rotors and stators have limits, and the nicks can be blended out if the damage is within those limits. There is an arbitrary line though where cost outweighs the benefit.
Do the tugs need any ATC authorization to cross taxiways? Since the AF plane was stopped on other side of service road, can't the tug driver safely assume the AA plane isn't moving until the AF plane has cleared that section? And bigger picture, isn't the true problem the AF plane increasing thrust without knowing there was a tug with containers passing just behind? The AF plane would have no way to know there was a tug crossing on service road behind it. If ATC doesn't manage tugs, do they have a responsibility to look both in front and behind a plane to ensure no tugs would be affected by a plane increasing thrust? Or is it assumed that no tugs would ever pass ahead or behind planes stopped on a taxiway?
@chrisgardner6677 Hard to say. I've seen some pretty serious aircraft damage incidents out here where people didn't lose their jobs. The labor union was able to save them, or there was proof that a combination of factors beyond the employee's control led to the aircraft damage that the company decided to proceed with just a very firm warning once a drug and alcohol test came back negative. Thank you for watching.
You mean the drivers are simply eyeballing the situation? This seems very insecure, I've always assumed ground vehicles were under some kind of ground control, similar to the aircraft. How did the driver in front know that the AF jet wasn't going to power up when he crossed? It seems to me any of them could be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Any system that relies on a single human's good judgement, attention to detail and perfection is bound to have accidents. That this sort of incident isn't more common reflects positively on the training of airport ground employees. Hopefully this is a learning experience and results in improvements to that training as well as better coordination between movements on the ground of vehicles and aircraft.
Interesting, something like this happened to a WestJet 787 at Gatwick last year. I know this because my motorcycle showed up in Toronto 3 days after me, because they were down 1 787 and my bike had to wait... Apparently not that uncommon...
Well based on the design of the blades in these engines, I can tell you all the blades in and through the entire engine are useless at this point. The modern processes used to solidify and grow them almost like a giant crystal (easiest way for me to say it) makes them strong, along with the coatings that are applied. But once they get damaged, the stress and fatigue to the blades at the damage point can never (as far as I remember) be fixed, making them no longer fit for use. So they question on this engine is, if they gut it and remove and replace all such materials, is that work even worth it (as it is likely cheaper to just get a new engine).
Shouldn't the pilot have been more situationally aware to not apply engine thrust with traffic directly in front making a crossing? No pilot error here?
Aircraft ALWAYS have the right of way on the AOA. No exceptions. The tug driver broke every rule in the book by driving between two aircraft that close that are taxiing.
This is actually a fairly cheap engine failure, (excluding the high replacement cost) since no engineering labor will be expended on a lengthy failure analysis or root cause investigation. Also, negative on the rebuild and/or using any parts as spares, because lawyers.
The cost of a fan blade is roughly $50,000 to $60,000. Also, the number one rule is not to be traveling behind or in front of an aircraft when the navigation lights are lit
The problem is there’s limited crossing points while managers demand you be on time. Safety isn’t followed from the top down this incident happens constantly because of pressure to be on time.
Hopefully it will be shown to shiny new managers who think they can polish their horn by harassing workers reporting to them to work to unsafe speeds.
What if it had been the worker who got pushed into the engine?
Absolutely true. I've had a lot of hot bags in my carts where I had to wait 5-10 minutes or more waiting to cross. I've had to double back and take the other service road along the Southern edge of T5 to get across. Takes longer, but it's less of a bottleneck over there and it's safer than attempting what's in the video.
There's absolutely no excuse for doing this, even if they were trying to be on time. Never drive behind an aircraft that has it's beacons on.
@@sunshineflyer managers don't care, they'll back off for a week and then it'll be back to business-as-usual screaming at employees to get the cargo out on time.
B.S. Safety is on YOU!
I saw this comment on another video, but I think it applies here. “The driver of that tug just became the subject of future training videos”
I keep hearing that he's a stellar employee and that this was a bad mistake. This looks like a lot more than a bad mistake to me. I don't know the guy, I cant speak for the rest of his work, but this is really bad. If I made a mistake like this, I'd expect to deal with the consequences of my actions.
@@ChicagoAirportSpotter Id say it was a Bad, Expensive Mistake. But still a mistake nonetheless. I’m sure he had the “Oh #$*%” moment we all would’ve had when he heard those engines spool up on the Air France, and saw those containers skidding towards the American Plane. I agree hopefully he owns up to it and learns from the mistake. Now, whether thats with his current employer, or someone else, completely depends on his attitude.
That's a twenty million dollar engine.
Very pricey accident indeed.
Yup the GEnx and Trent 1000 have a cost of around 20 million each
$20 million sounds like a bargain. I’ve seen $28 million. But in any case, a very costly incident.
300,000 per fan blade? That sounds extreme
@@dabneyoffermein595 Everything, all components in those engines are fabricated to precision from premium materials. This is why they are so costly.
@@67EndgameI worked on the assembly floor at P&WA a couple years in the late 1970s. Even then JT-9s were close to $2million. The paperwork for each engine was crazy. We used to kid around that when the weight of the paper equaled the weight of the engine the engine was done.
So finally, a reasonable straightforward explanation as to where your luggage went. The French did it.
I always blame the French. Not because they are particularly responsible. It’s just traditional.
the french made it, the american ate it. C'est la vie
😂
😅😅😅
The French aircraft was quoted as having said "so long, Ricky Bobby!"
The driver is lucky he didn't end up in the engine. Scary.
Or as I heard it called, a very expensive human blender.
That’s what I was thinking.
Or she?
@@cyclepath55555 If it were a woman she would have just kept driving without realizing what happened
@@LetsberealishLOL funny as hell but very true, someone would have had to chase her down just to let her know that something bad just happened.
Dad is a retired Pratt jet engineer -
He said there is no way in hell that engine will be rebuild - the inspection of every part from the imaging , dyes , measuring weighing would cost more than a new engine -
It’s also an insurance loss so the company is happy to repair the structure on the aircraft and slap a new engine on
Dad is wrong. Engine will be swapped, sent to MRO facility and fully rebuilt. FOD damage occurs daily, this is no big deal. It just looks cool.
@@car2069this wasn’t FOD, this was FCD- foreign CAN debris.
When was the last time you heard of a turbofan ingesting 150 lbs of aluminum??
@@RC-fp1tl Doesnt matter what it ingests, it goes to MRO and gets torn down, tested and reassembled.
@@car2069it will get torn down at an MRO but no part of that engine will ever fly again unless it’s as a new product made from the recycled metals.
No insurance company would allow it.
No airline would install it.
The liability should a crash occur with such parts in an aircraft would be insane and no one will take that liability on.
Further, every individual rotating part would have to be inspected to the maximum degree possible even to consider what might be salvageable.
Nope, that puppy is a scrap heap bound for the recycling furnaces.
I`m an ex- air traffic controler, and when I was in the active duty, no vehicule,whatsoever was allowed to cross taxyways, or move around taxiing aircraft without permission.
O'Hare is a different beast. Unfortunately we have many service roads crossing TWY's here.
the airport i work at requires at least two aircraft lengths in either direction in order to proceed and cross. what on earth is that person doing crossing right behind an aircraft. If that's an accepted policy of the airport then thats insane
Yeah, its standard to have restricted areas around running acft engines. An ingestion zone in front of the acft engines and a blast zone behind the engines. That tug should have been prohibited from going behind the front one, with the exception of a taxi control specifically directing both the acft and the tug for that maneuver so the acft would know not to throttle up.
The other thing is ground equipment being required to cross both taxi ways in one move. Thats moronic. Looking at the overhead view at 7:00 it appears that they could move the taxi lines farther apart from each other and make that center median crossing a required stop instead of a forced kamikaze.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge about this incident. It adds clarity and understanding for us who are less informed.
Poor knowledge! What airlines,contractor or airport. Teaches any type of vehicle drive behind a aircraft that has its engines running!
Good briefing on the luggage carts. Flew the 787 for my last 5 years. I saw another reader mentioned 20 million for one Pratt. The price for these aircraft (787-8) is just a little over 200 million. The 787-9 is over 240 million, and the 787-10 just under 300 million.
The OP mentioned he drives a fair amount at ORD. At least from my experience, ground handlers in O’Hare are pretty good about safe driving on the tarmac, as in not usually cutting us off as we were taxiing. There definitely have been countless ‘incidents’ at other airports (never at any of our international destinations….only in U.S. airports) where I had to slow or even stop the aircraft while a baggage handler crosses right in front of us, sometimes the driver not even looking. Just surprised this doesn’t happen more often.
I was a ramp controller for a few years, I took a lot of calls from pilots giving me the company name and vehicle number of vehicles that cut them off. And by "a lot" I mean 10-15 over 4-5 years. 1 is a lot, tbh. I followed up on every single one because I didn't want that idiocy on my ramp.
I remember one time I sheepishly slowed to a halt by the F Alley, and an RJ pilot waved me through. I looked around me, saw that everything was good, and I scooted across in front of him, gave him a thumbs-up, and immediately got pulled over by airport security 🤣 He let me go, though.
@@ChicagoAirportSpotter Always like to read about that type of story. Never was based in ORD, except for a month back in the mid 80s. Actually one of the best airports, excellent ATC, operations, as well as the city itself. Never visited any Ramp Controller, but did a tour of our OPs in SFO as I had a friend working there. Anyways, I just remembered that I need to subscribe to your channel. Retirement is fun every single day, but I still remain interested in Safety, CRM, etc.
Totally awesome presentation. You hit a home run with this. T/Y for putting it together and posting.
If that service road is that heavily travelled on a daily basis, they really need a tunnel. As for the video: thank you for posting and explaining. I have just 2 comments for improvement : about 3;40 you are talking about damage to the engine but the visual is still the container graphic. And at 5:06-5:35 a highlighter or arrow or something would have been helpful for the viewer. It's not a diagram most are familiar with and it seemed very detailed. BUT THANK YOU! It's a great vid and great explanation of the situation.
I'm still getting the hang of video editing, lol. I'll work on that in the future. Thank you for the feedback.
There used to be a road that went between L and M that went UNDER the taxiways.....why did CDA close it????? This would have prevented this.
You mean the "depressed roadway" that parallels the tram tracks? That's still there, but most people don't know about that road. I myself didn't know about that road until a few years into my airport career.
You may be surprised that the CDA for YEARS has had ZERO concept of how to design and implement the “new” ORD. This bottleneck here is the result of a complete lack of knowledge of how airport traffic should be managed and routed. Until they get off their collective A$$es and build two “end around” taxiways at the west end of 28R and 27L this issue will remain.
Oustanding analysis and summation! Keep doing these, very helpful to those of us that operate aircraft in/out of ORD.
Wow! I never thought something like that would happen. Thanks for a very well presented video and analysis. Glad no one was hurt but I bet the driver won’t be working there anymore.
Clear, well documented video. A good reference. 👍🏻🇬🇧
Great video, Chicago Airport Spotter. I thought it was going to be a fake because the “goods” were over two minutes in but I was pleasantly surprised. And your knowledge about the incident is a bonus. Keep up the good work.
I wouldn't do that to you guys 😆 Thank you for watching.
@@ChicagoAirportSpotter In a world full of clickbait you stand apart. Thank you for keeping it real and doing an excellent and concise presentation.
Kindly pardon if this has already been mentioned but the AKEs on those dollies, although light in comparison to others, would NOT have become free if the locks had been properly secured.
This is one of those safety violations that everyone ignores until something like THIS occurs then everyone claims they would never allow it to take place.
I saw it take place countless times at MEM (FedEx) and have no doubt it takes place at every other airport unless it’s noted that SAFETY is in the area.
More so civilian than military.
That’s simply fact.
The equipment used for these containers (cans) hasn’t changed for decades and until forced to do so will remain as it current is.
Solar powered LEDs (red/green) connected to proximity switches would literally cost less than $5 per dolly but who wants to do that when you could simply buy a $30 million engine every once in a while.🙄
Whatever saves money is inevitably what gets approved and in this case NOTHING is the cheapest option.
They’ll blame the tug driver because, according to protocol, THEY were the one responsible.
As long as the large corporations have a SOP they can point to and place the blame on an individual, as opposed to their SOP itself (which functions more efficiently when the SOP is NOT followed), they will sit back and say “Not our fault”.
A&P currently doing heavy checks on 737s here. Most likely the majority of the debris when through the bypass duct. Many of those front fan blades look ok from those pictures. It's possible most of the compressor and turbine stages are ok. Mechanics can swap this engine and inspect the pylon in 24 hours if theyre properly equiped at this airport. You'll need a new intake to bolt onto the new engine. The engine will go back to the manufacturer and get a complete overhaul. Most likely it will just need a lot of new blades. The shafts, cases, accessories, etc are probably all fine. It takes a lot to make an engine not worth salavaging at all.
Edit: someone below says his dad is a Pratt and Whitney engineer and he says it will be scrapped. If a P&W guy says it then I would defer to him, although engineers don't always know how maintenance really gets handled so it depends on their exact role. If they really do have to do crack inspections on every single part then I could see them scraping it, but I think it would be worth it to use any good parts as spares.
I agree accessories, and various parts will be salvageable, probably even undamaged and after inspection will be put into the spares bin, but I have my doubts that the engine core is at all repairable. I have no doubt a few pounds of metal passed through the hot section and centrifugal forces of anything that temporarily hung up on a fan or turbine blade would be flung out from the disk along with likely some broken off blades and impacted all along the inner walls of the core sections. Some probably jammed up as well putting torque that would likely bring shafts out of true, but they are pretty beefy so possibly that is one part inside the core that can be reused along with some injectors, but I think the rest would be too far gone since the disks, blades, and stator vanes were pitted, bent or scratched if not broken. I am not an engine mechanic but knowing how much damage a large bird can do (at 10 lbs or so) and birds being quite a bit softer and lighter than aluminum box that engine swallowed there is no doubt it was catastrophically damaged. I would bet that engine core and 90% of what is inside it is done. If I am not mistaken the guys helmet that went into an engine when he got sucked into the intake of an A-6 intruder destroyed that engine as well, and that helmet is just a few pounds of fiberglass and plastic. Granted the Dreamliner engine appeared to only be running at ground idle (since it was stationary on the tarmac) and since the Intruder was preparing for a cat shot it may have have been running up or at full power, which would make a difference but I don't remember and it may have also could have been getting hooked up and only at idle and engine RPM would certainly be a factor in the damage on both incidents.
I second your comment! Engineer thinks one way, mechanic thinks another, there's hope in that being overhauled. Also, from a lessor's or owner's standpoint, I don't think they would want to write that as a total loss.
I worked in certification at GE for a couple of decades until recently retiring. A bag of bolts that can fit in your pocket can trash an engine.
(So don't leave a bag of bolts anywhere near the intake when the engine is on the test stand.)
Yeah, there will be salvageable parts, but in today's world, they'll discard anything even a little "iffy".
@@UncleKennysPlace fair point. We actually had a few screws get sucked in at our maintenance facility recently, but it just needed some inlet repairs and a few new fan blades. The core was fine, thankfully. I assume they boroscoped every stage. It was on a 757.
@@larrybremer4930 hadn't thought about the shafts being out of true, that could cause bearing and bearing mount damage too.
Looking at this incident from a safety/risk accessment perspective there is usually multiple factors that when crossed especially in aviation that can lead to an accident/incident. # 1 as stated in comments there was a lack for situational awareness . Crossing behind a heavy is a recipe for disaster. There is enough jet blast to send everything including the containers flying. Most LD3 transports that i have seen do have some slack with the clamps to hold down the containers and with jet blast from a heavy i believe it is beyond what those to clamps are designed / intended to hold. # 2 haste to meet a deadline for baggage perfomance goal may be a factor as others have mentioned , compeling the driver to take a risk that is not safe nor recommended. # 3 maybe there is an issue with the layout and design of the airport around that and other issues compelling individuals to take risks that are not safe. On the map shown that area is a known hot spot. I am surprised there is a surface road crossing a movement area / taxiway. Are there tunnels there that can help to minimize / prevent taxiway incursions and provide a safe path to cross underneath. Where i work there are tunnels to cross underneath taxiways so aircraft and ramp traffic are separate near movement areas. Maybe this incident can lead to a redesign of the areas there to control the risk associated with the taxiway crossing there and some eduation in situational awareness training to prevent the multiple factors from coelesing into another incident in that area
Your video did a great job of explaining this. Keep up the good work.
I remember when the containers had doors/curtains on both sides and they would drive them around with Both sides fully open (when empty) to help prevent this from happening..... (i.e. extremely high resistance to jet (and propeller) blast!)
AND Thank You for the quick explanation .vs. a 15 to 25 minute explanation!!!
You did a great job showing the incident and explaining the contributing circumstances. Keep it up.
I’ve never understood people taking those kinds of risks driving around aircraft. My philosophy was always hey, if I’m stuck waiting because of a plane, too bad. You can’t win going up against an airplane.
Not sure. Trailer trucks beats car. Trains beats trailer. Yield to planes and I don't want to a see plane vs train.
They aren't driving around aircraft. They are driving down the internal service road.
Complacency kills. I used to work for Brinks Air Courier division, my driver went in front of an MD-11 as it was going on a taxi way one morning.
I am a retired DOA employee. MTD. This really brings back memories I've been gone for 12 years thanks for your post
Well done, it’s not often we see a catastrophic incident such as this. It could have been much worse with the debris flying around like that, you’ve done a pretty good job explaining some of the details👍
I was pleasantly surprised the news did not insinuate that this was somehow Boeing's fault.
I think people are VASLY underrating the possibility that the locks were either inop or (more likely) not fully engaged on the dollies. Considering the containers were all empty, I think it is highly likely that there was a slippage of safety standards (based on my own time on the ramp). Also notice that the AKE on Tug 1 is not closed, and the bulk cart on cart 2 are not closed.
So who trains any body to drive behind any aircraft that has engines running!
I was always way too nervous to drive my tug behind any aircraft at Hartsfield and I'm glad I never did. That so would've been my luck.
Thanks for the upload. Clear explanation of what happened and what usually goes on with the ground equipment.
Thank you for sharing this incident. I hope no one was hurt here!😮
This was very interesting. Thanks for all your efforts to put this together.
Thanks for the detailed account info of the incident. Few years back at O'Hare during a blizzard, a China Airlines Cargo Queen injested a luggage cart!
That plane was way offline during almost zero visibility whiteout conditions and plowed into staged AA cargo containers. The damaged engine was swapped out and it was on its way about a week later.
I was in air plane not long ago where they literally locked up the wheels while taxiing because a food services truck CUT OFF the aircraft! They need to be a little bit better about who they're hiring.
Who they hire is as irrelevant as you. The proper training and adhering to the training is the important thing
DEI
Knew someone was going to say "DEI" when you can just say "I'm racist and sexist"
Well done, this was very interesting to review. Modern airports seem to be busy beyond the point where the traffic therein can be operated without incident. Recently there was a collision between 2 jets on the ground while taxi-ing prior to departure. I’m constantly hearing about substandard performance on the part of ATC’s and ground controllers. Now being on the ground as well as in the air will cause nervous fliers more grief, moving forward…
To correct you a little. Yes, the fan blades will have to be changed. But the entire engine will have to be torn down and entirely rebuilt. FOD can have entered every part of the engine. After a complete inspection it will have to be balance checked and re-balanced from turbine blades forwards. Just imagine if one of the three central shafts were bent or even slightly unbalanced. Only one way to determine: tear it down to the last nut, bolt and retaining wire. Neither GE or R-R will stand behind anything less.
A bird strike can render an engine unrepairable. That engine is done, they will not repair it. It will be an insurance write-off.
@@justincaldarella more like chicago or the ground handling company will be buying american a new engine
@@justincaldarella Definitely. I was just looking at it from an engineers perspective. It's an insurance write off and will be parted out. Still has a couple million $$$ in parts.
The way things are going at Boeing the cowling may be gracing one of their upcoming trash piles.
@@elevatorcentralit was an American tug, dollies, and Iberia AKE containers. They're lucky in the sense that it all happened "in-house," so to speak, and can be handled internally between the airline and their own insurance.
Awesome, thank you for explaining.
Working at O’Hare 30+ years, I’ve personally seen many situations (aircraft strikes, Mother Nature, vehicle accidents, etc..) Even after years of experience, it’s a dangerous situation driving around the airfield but many incidents are avoidable.
If the ramp is unionized, there is a fair chance for correction. If they are on temporary contracts, they would be subject to the wimp of hurried up management. Fortunately this time is only containers and an engine, no sucky human fresh.
What's your point actually?
As A AP Mechanic for United that's going to be a whole Engine Replacement depending what The inside looks like
Well done. A little wordy, IMO, but well done. Most will not recognize that the A350 blew the containers off with 100+ mph jet blast, as at the point where the containers are flying the A350 has begun to move forward. Break away thrust can be 150 mph. Maybe more. It is for this reason we never ask pilots of large, heavy jets to “expedite” or “taxi without delay.” People have died in similar situations here at ORD as a result.
Definitely a little wordy - I did this off the top of my head without a script. If I do another one of these, I'm changing that. I had so many people asking me what happened that I got tired of typing it out, so I made a video to explain it to them and then decided to upload said video 😆
And thank you for the additional info. When I was a ramp controller, I often used the phrase "minimum breakaway thrust" on the frequency when guiding departing aircraft out off the ramp because we had so much activity behind them, we had to take every possible precaution to deal with the horrible layout of the Lima Alley.
Did the cargo tug require Ground Control permission to proceed across that taxiway between two operating aircraft?
No it is a active roadway to the cargo building, he was headed to the tunnel that goes under the runways.
5:32 your smoke detector battery is low
Betrayed by the ceiling 🦗 literally started beeping as soon as I started recording this. All is well, a new 9V battery has been procured and installed 😆
Good catch! Dang!
I thought that was mine 😅
lmao i was on that flight, lefthand side on a wing seat, it was a layover for me in chicago from london, i connected to this flight from madrid, its surreal seeing a plane i was in on camera on social media
Hello, I'm from the future, this literally happened again in the same spot to another (JetBlue?) flight a few days later lmao 😅
@@shadowblade232 yes, I posted a video about that, lol
For once someone that knows what they are talking about.... those containers have 2 sets of locks. 1 locks the container on the dolly to keep moving side to side... the other one keeps the container from being blown off (When these locks are spring loaded so no one really checks them.
It was more an issue of the jet blast of the Air France plane causing the problem than anything else. Plus- those containers were NOT secured to the carts in any way- the carts didn't even tip, the containers blew right off.
Good catch, ya the carts look like they're just doin fine.
Yes something was wrong with the dolly's the locks should of been able to hold them. If the locks are not set the cans would of fell off at his first turn. I would say he used the wrong dolly's for the equipment he was using.
What's amazing is that the containers that didn't get ingested continued down the taxiway where they possibly could have hit another vehicle.
Excellent breakdown!
During a parts shortage with long repair and maintenance times. Oof
The tug driver should start playing Corn Hole, horseshoes or mini golf.
Seriously, how many times a day does a tug driver with carts do just this task?
Countless.
Policy changes coming now and more miss connection for luggage.
This may fall under a condition called Normalization of Deviance.
Was there any damage to the aircraft too? Looks as if part of the container may have flown up into the side of the fuselage.
I lived in Chicago for 35 years. EVERY time I flew out of or into O'Hare, my suitcase was damaged, broken plastics, unnecessary scuffs and stains, beat up. They don't give a shit, at all. They walk around smugly like they own the place. The least they could do is the act like they care.
In this video the oblivious driver doesn't know they have empties?
Blame the manufacturers not the handlers to many doodads on the luggage and they are making them cheaper and cheaper.
Great reporting! Thanks for the good work!
Any report of damage to any aircraft behind the 787? Specifically the biz jet immediately behind the 787. Kinda looked like one of the bins was heading their direction. It’s a helpless feeling to be stuck in place on a taxiway & watch fod like that heading towards you!
What a unlucky chain of events that made this costly repair.
As an ORD airport employee myself, I witnessed an American Airlines employees lose 4 of these containers in the wind less than a week before this incident. I am not sure if it is an issue with their dollies (the platforms with wheels that you load the containers on) as they look incredibly cheap and flimsy compared to other airlines' equipment or if it is simply negligence from employees refusing to make sure their load is secured. Either way, that driver shouldn't have crossed the double taxiway with the A350 right there as you're supposed to give extra room to widebody aircraft to accomodate their massive engines and the crazy thrust they make even at idle power.
How is it that ORD ramp workers or aircraft/airline employees have special access to locations on airport property, between runways, at runway thresholds, etc. that the typical taxpayer and patron of the airport don't have access to, for plane spotting, YT channel content creation, etc? No one wants to answer the basic question about how a person can watch aircraft operations when we can't even park out on Irving Park Road or Mannheim Road to watch aircraft operations from a great distance? Does the ATC/FAA Tower folk approve of such dangerous filming locations? Are they even consulted? It's one thing to have a camera stationed on the roof of an adjacent business across the street from Midway Airport to capture runway and ramp action, but this stuff at O'Hare is over the top. Contrary to other large cities and their airports, the City of Chicago would rather prosecute aviation hobbyists than provide a safe parking area to view airport action.
@@RichardCurry-z1e I wouldn't know much about that, sorry. If I ever do record anything, I will film it from the ramp itself. I am not familiar with prosecution of aviation hobbyists taking photos/videos of air traffic or the random film locations that other employees may use.
@@RichardCurry-z1e Also I'd like to add that my airline does not allow us to cross any sort of taxiway or runway. We are only allowed to use the service roads but I can't speak for other categories of employees here.
@@malps420 Appreciate your airline rule adherence, but the tug in this video was on a so called service road that crossed a live taxiway. You can do damage by driving poorly right on the ramp, let alone the service roads, many of which are under grade level, tunneled, etc. Why aren't ramp drivers patched in to the ATC ground control frequencies so they can be guided by the people upstairs in the towers? Who is to blame for the bad decisions involved in the incident here?
@@RichardCurry-z1e Yes, I will acknowledge that this was one of the rare taxiway crossings for the service roads that we drive on. I don't think that it is necessary to be guided by the controllers upstairs as all employees are required to give way or give priority to aircraft taxiing. In this instance, there were several factors to cause this result and a lot of it is still speculation because not all the details have came out yet.
Firstly, we have no idea if the containers themselves were properly secured on the dollies. My airlines' dollies are very secure and even wind wouldn't have been able to knock them off if that was the case.
Secondly, there was another heavy aircraft in front of the taxiway that the tractor was driving through. In my opinion, I don't think that he should've crossed the taxiway while being sandwiched between two widebodies as we are supposed to give MUCH more space to widebodies as their engines are significantly larger and produce much more jet blast than your typical 737.
If the containers were secured, this could be blamed on the airline's use of unsafe equipment that obviously fail easily, but there's a chance that it could've also been employee negligence if they were not secured. Hope this helps!
Question: say the AA pilot had been very attentive and seen first container start to be blown off the cart and pressed the big red buttom "emergency engine stop" (f such exists). Would it have made any difference to engine damage? I know engines take forever to stop spinning, but curious if it is a logarithmic curve where thrust drops very fast, followed by long spin down without appreciable thrust, or whether it is more linear.
wasn't in the cockpit, so that's my first alibi ... but they were about to start moving again because AF ahead was starting ... so clearly there should have been a higher level of awareness prior to resuming taxi than when they were stopped.
... I've thought the same thing, though. The fan wouldn't be stopped, but I think it wouldn't have sucked the container into the inlet. The container would probably have still struck the cowl.
The damage isn't on the pilot(s) but it seems, if the video segment plays in real time, the speed of the fan could have been reduced to avoid ingestion.
Taxing, especially at ORD, is one of the most challenging/threatening parts of the job. I've done it for AA since '98.
I had not heard about this yet, thank you.
The engine shell held up excellently. Passengers could have been in danger!
An 9 hour engine swap she'll be back in action luckily it's a maintenance hub for American they have the ability to swap engines at O'Hare if they have it on hand ...-former Aviation Systems Tech based at O'Hare for American
Excellent video! WOW! You could Really see all that happened! One quick ?, why wasn’t the driver sucked in too? Or are these things remotely operated? In any event, awesome job with the video! 😊
@theunknowntxter1873 the driver was in the tug, which protected him. He got lucky. It also appears the Air France A350 just happened to add power just as or after the tug had cleared its engines, but the empty AKEs weren't so lucky.
Excellent video and narration.
The engine will undoubtably undergo a full rebuild.
Q : Are those luggage containers ever tied down to the cart, or are they just placed without any tiedown straps / securing locks ?
Worked for a PHX based airline in late 80’s, early 90’s. This type of thing happens regularly, conx bags sitting on a belt loader parked too close to the ingestion zone and all kinds of other FOD. Worst was the metal coupler on the end of the hose of an A/C cart that destroyed the #2 engine on a 757 while taxing up the j-line.
Bad judgement on driver,ergo; JOB OPENING!
Thanks for shareing, I was waiting on somebody to show video!
Excellent commentary also!👍🏿
Don't know why anyone would pass between two "live" acfts. 😮
Imagine sitting in a right window seat and seeing that large piece coming over the wing @ 5:00 and smacking against a few windows further back. Maybe it wasn't metal but the size of that piece would make it seem your number is suddenly up while stationary on a taxiway.
We was sitting in row 16 by the window, I saw the engine shake and make a lot if noise, then something came flying out and hit our window. Made a bit of noise and did startle passengers around us. The window was marked - we made sure the crew were aware of that when we alighted some 70 minutes later.
@@GordonSkinner Very interesting. Thank you both. I guess it was gone before any panic could set in. The crew up front shut the engine down promptly.
I wondered if they announced anything or came back to look out. A mark on the window as well. Stay safe. I hope your journey wasn't badly affected other than the 3 hour delay etc.
Is there footage with more detail. That genx is definitely overwritten.
There are at least 6 cameras that would've caught this, but this is the only footage I've been made aware of.
Have not watched your videos since 2015 nice video
@@Chinemeremdozie Hehe, welcome back 😉
Excellent and very informative video; thanks very much. Amazing and frightening how strong those engines are - how much ‘suck’ they have! Thanks very much indeed for sharing.
Welp...needless to say, that driver no longer has a job.
did you notice the tail was missing on the aircraft above the road on your map image...
very interestign I like this tpe
@jimonthecoast3234 Yeah, just got cut off during the camera pass. It happens. I use Google Maps a lot for work and often notice buses, trucks, trains, airplanes, and ships cut off. Most of the Google Maps aerial imagery over populated areas is done from prop planes, not really by satellite.
I wonder if that was annunciated or un-unannunciated?
Is there a specific reason the AKEs aren't secured to the trailer while in tow to prevent this situation? At least they would stay attached to the tug and trailers in this kind of situation.
jet engines, and many other things that produce huge amounts of energy (relative to myself) give me an almost primordial sense of fear. like..."do not go near that thing."
Very informative. Thank you.
Difference between narrow body and wide body - the tug driver MIGHT have gotten away if it was a A320, but a Heavy is a huge NO NO to go behind even at idle thrust - ESP with empty LD4s
LD3
One problem here is that for crossing ground traffic the holding points are not at save positions. It should not happen that the distance of stopped planes to crossing vehicles is within jet blast range.
Many years ago, I spent a night in a terminal at O'Hare between flights, and was entertained by a homeless gentleman telling his life story. He said he was homeless because unemployed, and unemployed because of a ramp incident. Apparently an 11 year veteran of working the ramp, he noticed a serious safety violation near a plane he was not responsible for, and urgently pointed it out. He was canned for not paying attention to his own plane, and the person in charge of the other plane's ramp crew was defensive of his own authority. Anyway, something did happen, and they had to pull that plane for inspection. I don't know how much of that to believe, but it seems possible .
Are there any requirements for basic intelligence to work at O'Hare? Or are there no consequences for stupidity in Chicago?
My only time to arrive/depart Chicago was interrupted by an idiot ground staff that pulled the emergency slide right before we were supposed to board. I thought it was a one-off thing but apparently it wasn't.
@feoxorus lmao, I spend a great deal of time questioning the intelligence of some of the people I work with. I'm not perfect, but DAMN! Some people have really done some dumb shit in my time here. A gate agent I was once dating was almost killed by an emergency slide deploying into the jetway. Flight attendant (ORD-based, of course) forgot to disarm it before opening the door. My girlfriend had JUST moved out of the way and back into the jetbridge driver's cab to check her phone when the slide shot right past her. Lucky girl, that one.
The aircraft is back in service. I don’t know if the engine was replaced or not.
@flyingsteel Thanks for the update - I was just talking to someone about this about 15 minutes ago. Looks like it was only AOG for about a week.
This may sound stupid to ya’ll, but why can’t there be a grid aka screening at the fan inlet ? I mean why would it hinder the airflow so much ? Like 2” x 2” animal type mesh or something.
The engine compressor blades are a much smaller diameter than the fan you see. I suspect most of the debris shot out around the engine, not thru it. The nose cowl suffered a lot of damage but I'm sure the engine can be rebuilt.
Yea OK. Its JUNK. Dye penetrant test every piece in that engine, a rebuild would 2x the cost.
Engine is junk.
Engine is junk. Everything got ruined. Small bits got into the core and good lucky cleaning that up. You can’t rebuild a damaged jet engine, it’s not that simple as you obviously think.
@@Roboseal2 obviously the fan is scrap, but the core can be rebuilt depending on severity and extent of damage. The rotors and stators have limits, and the nicks can be blended out if the damage is within those limits. There is an arbitrary line though where cost outweighs the benefit.
@@zachgarner853 If this is credible, (We have no way to tell), should be updated and put onto the incident log on Aviation Herald
The nacelle and and protection shield,, damaged,, more than just the engine.
Wow. People on the plane must have been pissed
The plane was arriving not departing. It did take 45 minutes after it happened for them to get to there gate and finally get off
My nicotine anger level would be creeping up as they follow thru on the spot. So close and yet so far..
The folks on the next flight were probably upset…
@@macking104 Yes, taking off with only one working engine could make some of them nervous 😁
@@MrTurboCowboyTHEIR
Nice review, was there any discussion on radio from the pilot you could have sync'd it with the event as we were watching
Do the tugs need any ATC authorization to cross taxiways?
Since the AF plane was stopped on other side of service road, can't the tug driver safely assume the AA plane isn't moving until the AF plane has cleared that section? And bigger picture, isn't the true problem the AF plane increasing thrust without knowing there was a tug with containers passing just behind? The AF plane would have no way to know there was a tug crossing on service road behind it. If ATC doesn't manage tugs, do they have a responsibility to look both in front and behind a plane to ensure no tugs would be affected by a plane increasing thrust?
Or is it assumed that no tugs would ever pass ahead or behind planes stopped on a taxiway?
Will the damaged engine be just written off given how much it'll probably cost to repair?
Now, can we get the security camera footage of the 2007 O'Hare UFO please?
Will the tug driver be fired? Thank you for your insight and knowledge.
@chrisgardner6677 Hard to say. I've seen some pretty serious aircraft damage incidents out here where people didn't lose their jobs. The labor union was able to save them, or there was proof that a combination of factors beyond the employee's control led to the aircraft damage that the company decided to proceed with just a very firm warning once a drug and alcohol test came back negative. Thank you for watching.
@@ChicagoAirportSpotter Mahalo! Subscribed! Keep em coming!
Never stand close behind a horse.
the daily cost for airlines due to ramp rash is astronomical....
You mean the drivers are simply eyeballing the situation? This seems very insecure, I've always assumed ground vehicles were under some kind of ground control, similar to the aircraft. How did the driver in front know that the AF jet wasn't going to power up when he crossed? It seems to me any of them could be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Any system that relies on a single human's good judgement, attention to detail and perfection is bound to have accidents. That this sort of incident isn't more common reflects positively on the training of airport ground employees. Hopefully this is a learning experience and results in improvements to that training as well as better coordination between movements on the ground of vehicles and aircraft.
Interesting, something like this happened to a WestJet 787 at Gatwick last year.
I know this because my motorcycle showed up in Toronto 3 days after me, because they were down 1 787 and my bike had to wait... Apparently not that uncommon...
Well based on the design of the blades in these engines, I can tell you all the blades in and through the entire engine are useless at this point. The modern processes used to solidify and grow them almost like a giant crystal (easiest way for me to say it) makes them strong, along with the coatings that are applied. But once they get damaged, the stress and fatigue to the blades at the damage point can never (as far as I remember) be fixed, making them no longer fit for use. So they question on this engine is, if they gut it and remove and replace all such materials, is that work even worth it (as it is likely cheaper to just get a new engine).
Shouldn't the pilot have been more situationally aware to not apply engine thrust with traffic directly in front making a crossing? No pilot error here?
It was the plane in front that rev'd up and the engine thrust was what caused the container to depart the trailer!
Aircraft ALWAYS have the right of way on the AOA. No exceptions. The tug driver broke every rule in the book by driving between two aircraft that close that are taxiing.
@@rixxroxxk1620 He should be an EX tug driver now!
This is actually a fairly cheap engine failure, (excluding the high replacement cost) since no engineering labor will be expended on a lengthy failure analysis or root cause investigation. Also, negative on the rebuild and/or using any parts as spares, because lawyers.
The cost of a fan blade is roughly $50,000 to $60,000. Also, the number one rule is not to be traveling behind or in front of an aircraft when the navigation lights are lit
A350: oops (smirking)
Can the tugs communicate with planes or tower ? How do tugs know planes intensions ?