Haneda Accident | New Audio + Transcript on Japan Airlines Crash
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 янв 2024
- ***CORRECTION***: Thumbnail updated with correct position of Dash-8. CCTV footage clearly shows JA722A entering the runway and lining up for takeoff. The bright white light is not the strobe light as stated in the video, but the landing light.
02/JAN/2024
A Japan Airlines A350-941 performing flight from Sapporo RJCC to Tokyo Haneda RJTT was touching down on runway 34R when the aircraft impacted a Japanese Coast Guard Dash-8 and burst into flames on the runway.
All people onboard evacuated.
5 of the 6 occupants of the Coast Guard aircraft received fatal injuries. The Captain survived but received serious injuries.
Information to be updated as more official reports release.
______________
EXTENDED AUDIO AFTER THE ACCIDENT - • Japan Airlines on Fire...
______________
Your support is really important and appreciated to keep these videos coming! =)
-- / vasaviation
-- paypal.me/VASAviation
Become a VIP member of VASAviation! -- / @vasaviation
Join VASAviation's Discord -- / discord
Twitter/Facebook/Instagram -- @VASAviation
Audio source: www.liveatc.net/
![NOSFERATU - Official Teaser Trailer [HD] - Only In Theaters December 25](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/b59rxDB_JRg/mqdefault.jpg)
***CORRECTION***: Thumbnail updated with correct position of Dash-8. CCTV footage clearly shows JA722A entering the runway and lining up for takeoff. The bright white light is not the strobe light as stated in the video, but the landing light.
With the help of subscribers and now the official release of the radio transcript, I decided to update the previous video including now some transcript and audio clips from before the accident. Unfortunately some of the audio is clogged or noisy in the recording so we can't hear the actual exchange. However the Japanese Authorities have released the transcript.
Also it's been released that there was a NOTAM reporting that the stop bar lights on intersection C5 were out of service (like a traffic light which permits/denies clearance towards the runway, for those non-aviation people)
Now we know that:
JAL516 is cleared to land and pilots so readback.
JA722A is cleared to hold short of the runway at C5. They enter and line up on the runway instead.
JAL131 is near runway 5. They are the first ones to report fire on the runway.
JAL166 is approaching the runway behind JAL516. Instructed to go around as the accident occurs.
JAL25 is the departure that takes off before JAL516.
VAS, extra information for you. The 5 of the 6 occupants on JA722A who received fatal injuries has passed away. The last one who is the captain on JA722A escape from the flame but received serious injuries.
I hope everyone is alright on both flight. Wishing people in Japan whether they are in the incident or in the earthquake zone, stay alive and be safe.
I was just gonna ask you about this.
There is a zoomed and uncut video of the accident, where you can pretty clearly make out (via taxi light and vstab reflection) that JA722A taxied onto the runway, and turned to line up before stopping. JA722A was also stopped on the runway for a good 40 seconds before JAL516 landed on top of it.
In Japan, stop bar light system is operated only when RVR is below 600m.
Even if stop bar light system wasn’t inoperative, it would not have been used on such a good weather situation.
I think it’s more like C5 to like C14 if I remember correctly
Damn, I'm really sorry for the surviving pilot too. It will be hard living with that.
In Japanese culture, people who feel they are to blame for a tragedy will sometimes take their own life.
I hope this doesn't get all pinned on the DHC8 Captain for that reason alone. But it doesn't look great at the moment.
Especially in the Japanese culture where honor such an important component.
Yes, I share your sentiments as well. Especially in a culture that has a heavy emphasis on personal responsibility. I hope the pilot gets the necessary support as well.
I said the same
What about the ATC?
The crew did an outstanding job getting everybody out and even, apparently, avoiding a still running engine. This could have been much worse.
Better wait for the official reports. Some reliable sources claim it took 18 minutes before the last person got off.
I've also read that it took 8 minutes for them to start the process and 18 minutes before the last person was evacuated. There's a huge discrepancy going on somewhere, as we have the "great job acting so fast" vs the way too long 18 minutes report. We should know more soon.
Apparently it took 18 minutes to complete the evacuation, with confusion about whether the plane was on fire. That's not an awesome job. No lives were lost in spite of the evacuation, not because of it.
Ever since the Saudia flight 163 disaster, if a plane I'm on crash lands and I see smoke of flames, you have exactly 10 seconds to start an evacuation before I am literally overpowering everyone in my way and starting it myself. I am not burning to death waiting for the captains permission.
@@gokmachineYes. 18 minutes when the last person, the last pilot, got off the burning plane. Two front evacuation slides and only one left rear slide were deployed.
For people who is wondering: Japan ATC follows standard icao phraseology so pilots are well aware what they are saying and what we are expecting, they are one of the most efficient controllers I have ever encountered. For a non English native speaker, sometimes ATC in the US are more difficult to understand than controllers with strong accent, many (and I said many not all) ATC in the US given instruction not following icao standard phraseology and mix with slang and jargon that only American understand. From cockpit it’s very difficult to see a small plane (sometimes even bigger plane) on runway, especially during flare. From lesson one of the flight training to airlines operation, we are educated to make a conscious effort look towards the far end of the runway and avoid any temptation to fixate on the touchdown zone, so it’s not surprise that all 3 pilots in the cockpit did not see the DSH-8 on the runway. Strobe, position light, nav light are very easy to overlaps on the runway edge light or other airport environmental lighting, I think this is one of the factor contributing to 1991 Los Angeles runway incursion accident also.
Thanks. I was getting sick of reading the brain//dead comments suggesting their bad English caused the accident when near-misses happen in English-speaking countries all the time.
Also, I'd imagine, at such a high work-load phase of flight, scanning the runway for anything that might be on there is way beyond the bandwidth of the pilots plus I'm not entirely sure anything could have been done to avoid the dash8 by the time they saw it. Imagine if they had initiated a go-around and still hit the dash8, it would be a far more tragic incident. There is always going to be a human factor because humans make mistakes and anyone who thinks otherwise does not belong in the cockpit imo. We cannot prevent humans making mistakes anymore than we can train our lungs to breath using water but we can mitigate the human factor with preventative measures to reduce the likelyhood.
So probably some stronger lights on the runway could've prevented all this? Even though I know that the Dash-8 probably did a human error.
@@QueenJaneway A runway with intense light would also caused illusion, RJTT is actually a well-lit airport that even some pilots deem too bright.
@@QueenJaneway runway brightness is a double edged sword plus I believe the runway lights are directional as they are only really meant for departure and arrival. A number of people reckon that they have seen a NOTAM about the stop bar being inop (line of red lights where you hold) Imagine the situation where you are used to seeing a red line of lights that disappears when it is clear to enter the runway. Runway lighting is a double edged sword, there is such a thing as too bright as well as too dim
i'm amazed that anybody can understand air traffic controllers enough to transcribe let alone to react in real time
That's exactly what I'm thinking. Their speech seems so casual and relaxed, not clear and authoritative.
idk why but you actually could hear them clearly inside the cockpit
I’ll bet their English is better than your Japanese.
It sounds clear in the cockpit under normal conditions, the garbled recordings we normally hear are due to multiple audio channels overlapping, compressing and recording in real time. Normally the only time pilots wont hear a message clearly is when two planes are trying to talk to the same frequency at once.
It'd be clear if we actually got a direct stream from the tower, but these recordings are almost always just an amateur radio nearby the airport, which puts the tower and planes on the ground very low on the horizon.
One of the main factors we all have control over that saved the lives of the A350 passengers (not wanting to distract from the amazing job the cabin crew did) which is that no passengers tried to take their hand luggage with them and also, I expect most of them had listened to the safety brief and knew how to get off the plane. Know how to get out (count rows to nearest fwd exit AND rear exit so you can feel it by hand if you cannot see) before push-back, read and understand the safety card and listen to the cabin crew brief regardless of how frequently you fly as it makes it fresh in your mind and you better prepared if it is needed. Trying to take your bag with you is attempted murder, people!
The cabin crew most definitely did not do an amazing job. It took them 8 minutes after the plane had already stopped on the runway engolfed in flames before they opened the doors, and then a further 10 minutes to get everyone out. That is an incomprehensibly bad performance, and those hundreds of people are lucky that the aircraft resisted to the fire for so long.
Fair enough, the main problem was that cabin crew was waiting on the pilots for confirmation on which exits to use to exit the plane. Pilots were having a very difficult time gauging the extent of inflammation and the effect it would have on potential exits (remember it would suck the oxygen out of the plane if they opened on the inflamed side). Arguably though there should definitely have been a quicker protocol response because that's something that needs to be practiced and engaged, so it'll definitely become part of a CRM/safety protocol case study. Ideally should have taken less than a minute for them to identify the extent of the fire and respond accordingly.
@@AnnicK.Zoloft Fire needs to be considered.. The crew followed captain's instructions. It seems pilots communicated with the towers or firefighters to make sure the passengers didn't exit through the burning sections.
@@AnnicK.Zoloft Wow, if that is true those people were extremely lucky. If I was sitting next to an emergency exit door after that plane comes to a stop, provided there was no fire or immediate danger outside my window, I'm opening that damn door and bailing out. I've been a business traveler for over 30 years and I thought that was the proper protocol anyway? I don't remember ever reading or hearing instructions to "wait for approval" before an exit-row passenger should open the exit in an emergency.
@@crocodile1313 As with so many of these situations, what seems correct when you have very little information about the situation, you realise is totally wrong when you understand it enough to be able to make those decisions. I'm definitely no expert but what I understand is that evacuation using slides usually involves some injuries. Also, once the passengers are outside of the aircraft, they are uncontained and could wander off, potentially onto an active runway. the aviation industry, quite rightly, doesn't work off the basis of "well, just don't do that" but puts active measures in place to prevent these things happening because all humans can and will make mistakes. The slides will only be used if required. Should the PIC decide that it is safe to wait for stairs and transport to arrive at the scene then they will wait for that to prevent injuries from slide evacuation and ensure passenger containment
Thank you for the time and effort you put into these videos. Keep up the amazing work.
Thank you for the support. I continue to work to update the comments or videos as more information releases.
Im the only one that points out there is no voice recording at all in the released transcript? Only some text. (for the Dash8)
Thanks for your transcript, it as made things a lot clearer as to what as happened. RIP to all the 5 people on board the Dash 8 and amazing work by the flight crew for saving all those people's lives
The fact that you cant understand it (in English) says everything, doesnt it? They couldnt understand it, either, so lined up in the middle of the landing zone. Speak slower and clearer.
@@fdllicks yes, I couldn't understand it when I heard it. Which begs the question: Why is a Japanese airport using English for its radio communication? If a native English speaker like myself cannot understand the communication, imagine how much more difficult it is for those whose English is a second language. (In defense of the traffic controller who spit out that rapid fire garbled communication, the pilot on JA722A should have asked him to repeat the instruction, or at least repeated it back to him. Apparently there was no acknowledgment of having received the communication by the pilot.)
@@pimacanyon6208 They were using English because English is the international standard language of aviation. Anyone desiring to become certificated under the aegis of any nation that is signatory to the ICAO treaties must demonstrate English proficiency.
That said, it is a fact that English is a second language to many, if not most, of the world's pilots and controllers. It thus behooves all pilots and controllers to adhere to standard phraseology as outlined in the Pilot/Controller Glossary.
It will be a while before we know what actually happened but my guess is that non-standard phraseology on the part of the controller met expectation bias on the part of the Dash 8 pilot, with disastrous results.
@@johnopalko5223 thanks. I did not know that English is international standard language of aviation. So you're saying that all airports, all over the planet, Germany, France, Russia, China, Thailand, Zimbabwe, etc.--they all use English for tower to airplane communication?
@@pimacanyon6208yes
Yeah several pilots I have watched Blancolorio channel especially did give several examples of why it’s difficult to see a smaller aircraft like that at night on the runway. I honestly think JAL A350 didn’t see anything until it was too late.
I remember landing behind a small aircraft in France, Tower said traffic rolling for takeoff and never saw it until they were airborne, out of the airport environment. It's too much lights out there to differentiate a small aircraft.
I don't think they saw it at all, I think the first they knew something was there was when they registered they hit something.
They would have been flaring for landing so yeah doubt they could see right under their nose.
@@TheBattousai2004 you might be right, especially since C5 enters right after the aiming point for 34R.
According to AVHerald, JAL has made a statement that "There were three pilots in the cockpit, none of them was able to see the DH8C, therefore a go around was never considered."
This accident is so tragic. I’m sorry to see that it happened.
Very sad for families of those who lost their lives. Thank you for your continuing reporting. The close up of the moment of collision was informative. I agree, there did appear to be forward motion.
There's an extended camera feed which shows the Dash sitting still there for nearly a minute. I think they got pushed by the JAL's nose (which had impact damage).
Always nice to learn the real things what actually happened more than any of reconstructions later on. Thanks for sharing!
In addition to the amazing work the crew did, what saved the passengers was that they did not panic and did as instructed
JAL516 is actually very lucky considering the grim circumstances. A350 is tall from ground & huge compared to the Dash-8. It also hit the Dash-8 on/during normal landing (didn't crash to the ground), and main landing gears seems more or less intact.
The plane didn't break apart, lowering the risk of pax injuries & give them more time to evacuate. Rest in peace for the 5 Dash-8 crews.
Nor turn towards terminal or water either side of runway
Landing gear was not intact
@@utkarsh1874 Forward landing gear yeah, but both back landing gear was fine.
00:30 JA722A reporting "on C" !!! For whatever reason, Runway 34R / 16L is also called "C-Runway" on several operational procedure informations (look for Haneda runway C on google). Confusion between JA722A and ATC possible? ATC instructed JA722A to "Taxi to holding point C 5" (see live ATC transcript). Maybe coastguard crew somehow confused "C-Runway" with parallel "Taxiway C" ? (see HND ground charts)
of all the places that shared the transcripts only here that I can find audio too. keep up the good work!
Thank you for this upload and accurately sourced information
As in all aviation accidents, there will be a combination of factors. The proximate cause is the Dash-8 taxing onto the runway without a clearance. The transcript clearly shows that the Dash-8 read back correctly the hold short instruction. So the action of the pilot of Dash-8 shows a confirmation bias of what he did was what he was told to do even though it wasn’t.
For those who question the proficiency of English spoken, don’t forget the sheer volume of instructions back and forth over the years and this has not been a problem.
Investigators will have to look into the human factors. Was the CG crew fatigued? Was the tower overwhelmed and understaffed? Were there any technical issues?Did the taxiway lighting failure contribute. Just to name a few things.
It’s the Swiss cheese model of failure.
Thankfully the professionalism of the airline crew and the good behaviors of the passengers prevented the last slice of the cheese to line up all the holes.
From all I've gathered so far, the Dash-8 did NOT have clearance to move- totally at a loss as to why that pilot would begin pulling out. However, he DID survive, so maybe one day we'll find out.
In the publicly released recordings, the ATC audio leaves a lot to be desired. I wonder what the clarity was in the aircraft. One aspect is recording quality, another aircraft is clarity of the spoken word. From the internet its nearly impossible to tell how much of which is at issue.
@@WSAndersonwhat we hear is almost always far worse than what the pilots and controllers can hear, because we usually are listening to amateur recordings using simple single receivers. In any case the coast guard pilot's read back confirmed he heard the instruction correctly.
Today in the news here in the Netherlands it was stated that the surviving pilot of the Dash 8 has said that he was 100% sure he had a line up clearance from ATC...
@@Ztbmrc1 We would find out once the CVR on the JCG plane was examined.
@@Ztbmrc1 Which though he believes it, in no way means his recollection is accurate. Only ATC recordings and CVR data can validate what was said.
Thank you very much!👍
Just realized the view passengers on the Delta that landed on 34L must have had. Aweful thing to see, especially at that time, where you dont know of the number of casualties. RIP to the CG crew.
Thank you, Victor to the updates and correction. Indeed it looks like the CG AC was fully lined up and the 350 just lands on top of the Dash 8. This is bringing back a lot of memories for me, having worked a few crash recoveries, though nothing this terrible.
1:25 was surprised to hear the clear to land clearance
the voice of the Delta pilot made me think he saw it happen very clearly. Passengers probably not so much?
@@iocat if you look at the diagram of Haneida, there is a clear view of 34R from 34L along taxiway G and H, which goes right into C5 where the incursion happened. Passengers definitely saw the fire ball.
I imagine that clearance was given before tower realized how bad it was. Also, it was on short final, and I imagine that it was easier to just land them rather than give them a go around. Fire trucks werent even rolling yet, but still, they landed and probably were waiting on a taxiway for a good bit while the airport was closed and no movement was cleared.
Its still very tragic, and I would not want to be the CG Capt, surviving and knowing your whole crew is gone.
There was another Delta flight waiting on C1 to depart. Anyone on the left side of that aircraft would have been able to see the entire thing.
@@magical_catgirl
Yep that was the place to be, those people be telling this story til the day they die.
I suspect the Dash-8 pilot did not know he was on the runway while he was on the runway.
He thought he was still on Charlie 3/4 approaching the runway, expecting to see the stop bar lights and go from there, not knowing the lights were inoperative, which was clearly stated in the NOTAM that he had neglected to heed. Lots to learn from this tragedy -- what went terribly wrong, and what went miraculously right (in cabin evac).
Thanks for sharing … there’s a lot of safety lesson to learn 🙏🚁🚁🙏
NO.1 Thank you
Inoperative stop bar lights were also a contributing factor in the Linate Airport runway incursion disaster.
That doesn’t matter - you only proceed onto an active runway if you THINK you have clearance. Lights or not, you don’t just accidentally end up on a runway and go “oh damn! How’d I go from a taxiway to being turned and lined up on this huge expanse of concrete?!” lol
They clearly thought they were to line up and wait, we may never know why.
@@EstorilEm I do agree with you however I think you meant to say, you should never proceed if you think. Only proceed if you know. I learned a very valuable lesson in the military and that is there is a huge difference between "you think" and "you know."
@@airlessballoon7804 "Thinking" can get you into a world of hurt.
And this ended up with a few people busted. I was ATCo too and we had to study this accident several times.
The surviving captain of the Dash 8 said he thought he was cleared to takeoff on 34R.
Very good information. The Dash 8 did not follow instructions., should have been aware of the NOTAM, but disregarded their instructions
This is just so sad. There so many measures to avoid this, and yet, tragic happens. Even one life is too much to loose, but at least the loss of life was minimal, considering how bad this could have been.
0:47 Thanks for that box. I totally had no idea where to look, even though you already showed that exact clip 5 seconds earier
The security footage shows JA722A roll right past the hold short line and was on the runway centerline, as if they were told to line-up and wait, for more than 40 seconds before the collision. Still trying to wrap my head around this one.
The stop bars were inop in the published NOTAM. That could have made the difference, but still...
I'm guessing that fatigue from the earthquake contributed. Especially in a disaster-relief agency. Long hours, worrying about loved ones, many practical complications to their personal lives.
The pilot of JA722A has said that he believed he was cleared to enter, and those actions support that claim, but the transcript says otherwise. Given that the pilot read back the clearance on the transcript, I'm sure it will come down to some mental factors, like stress/fatigue/etc.
@@sturmovik1274 plus no RED STOP BARS, number ONE on the radio to them sounded like we are number one to go and the red bars are OFF
"Number One" only means that you are number one in line for departure, that there is no one else waiting ahead of you. It doesn't mean anything regarding actual takeoff. The only words that authorize takeoff are, "Cleared for takeoff". This has been beaten into every professional pilot in the world ever since previous accidents caused by unclear terminology.@@claudiobertadeazevedo4669
・JA722 belongs to the Japan Coast Guard and is given priority takeoff and landing during normal official duties.
・The aircraft was carrying out a total of four round trips over two days, and was on its fifth departure at the time of the accident.
・It is unclear whether the pilot was the same on the previous four flights.
・Although it was official business, it was not a rescue operation but a transport of relief supplies, so it is unclear whether priority takeoff and landing was given on the previous four flights.
So thankful for the cabin attendant that let the pilots know about the cabin fire. So many accidents turn out so much worse than they could have been, because the pilots were unaware of what was going on in the other areas of the plane.
Another comprehensive breakdown of events, and preliminary analysist, on your part.
You verified my first thought of why copilot did not SEE or ACKNOWLEDGE the A350, a guarter mile away.
Did P.I.C even ask,"Clear right?"
And if so ,did 2nd respond with" landing traffic!"
Only tapes will tell, IF the Dash 8 had it.
Another great job, Juan!
My "Go-To Guy: for up to date aviation info, good or bad.👍🏿🥂
They began to move onto the runway maybe 90 seconds before collision so the A350 was still 2 or 3 miles out and maybe thought was headed to a parallel runway.
the pilots of the passenger aircraft must be traumatised, even of they didn't see the smaller aircraft they were at the helm. Kudos to the cabin crew for saving everyone, sadness for those on the smaller aircraft who didn't survive.
Coast Guard Plane went onto the runway without permission. ATC did not see the Coast Guard plane lining up for take off. The JAL pilots did not see the Coast Guard plane on the runway while landing. 3 failures that caused the accident.
So if I understand this correctly: The Coast Guard's Dash-8 was only told to wait *before* the runway, but instead went *inside* the runway already. correct?
in any case, the crew of JAL 516 must be awarded for remembering their training well
Thank you
Thank you for the caption, I didn’t think they were speaking English.
The thumbnail’s positioning of the Dash 8 is incorrect. It was actually on the runway facing forward (in a takeoff position). This is evident in the damage on the nose area and the engines of the Airbus A350. Basically think of the Los Angeles international airport runway disaster in 1991 that involved a USAir Boeing 737 (Flight 1493) and a Skywest Airlines Fairchild Swearingen Metroliner (Flight 5569).
Edit: Oh and positioning of the Dash 8’s remains after the collision on the runway. Which matches up as well.
Edit 2: Glad the thumbnail was corrected.
Looks like they were turning on the line-up, right when the impact occurs.
@@VASAviation No, they were fully lined up and were on the runway for about 45s.
Everyone, take a look at the damage to the inlets of both engines of the A350, which suggests to me that the Dash 8 was lined up on the runway and the A350 inlets impacted both wings of the Dash 8 from the rear.
There is a zoomed and uncut video of the accident, where you can pretty clearly make out (via taxi light and vstab reflection) that JA722A taxied onto the runway, and turned to line up before stopping. JA722A was also stopped on the runway for a good 40 seconds before JAL516 landed on top of it.
@@_Spado how can an airplane stay on the runway unnoticed by atc for that long and still give clearance to land to the other aircraft?
The stop bar lights of taxiway C were out of service that day. If the lights were working that day maybe the coast guard plane would have double confirmed with the tower before going into the runway...
That explains a lot. The dash-8 probably stopped passed the hold point because of that.
I believe the surviving pilot said they thought they had takeoff clearance. I don't know if the lights would have stopped them from entering the runway. It seems like they also turned onto the runway, and didn't just overshoot the hold short line. They seem like they knew where they were, and didn't just realize they shouldn't be there. I expect this will be a case of expectation bias, similar to that business jet collsion at HOU where a guy took off without clearance and clipped the tail of an arriving jet.
If you look at the footage you can see the vertical stabilizer of the DHC8 illuminated by the landing lights of the A359 just before the impact
Thanks for the thumbnail. I understand it's still early for full details and not official, but the sketch helps me understand potential orientation, position, and scale of the Dash 8 more clearly. Until this I wasn't sure whether the strike occured on the port or starboard side of the A350, what part of the Dash 8 was truck first, and what angle. Seems very plausible..and now kinda wonder if the large A350 with far more people was lucky it may have gone mostly over the top of the Dash 8. ...and obviously still horrible for the Coast Guard crew. :(
From the damage videos taken before fire totally engulfed the A 350 it looks like the nose was damaged by striking the tail of the Coast Guard plane and the engines struck the wings of the smaller plane, rupturing the wing fuel tanks and setting the fuel on fire. Some burning fuel probably splashed on the A 350 which eventually set it on fire as well. It took a while though, and that was long enough to evacuate all of the passengers safely. Good design, less flammable materials and good luck all played a part.
it doesn't look like the Dash-8 wing strobe lights were on so it definitely would have been difficult to spot the plane. The Dash-8 read back the clearance but was either tired or distracted by speaking with the other crewmembers and took "number 1" as a cue to line up or he completely missed the hold short line in the darkness. I'm thinking the latter since his wing strobes weren't on.
"Tired or distracted". Agreed, because of the earthquake. They were a disaster-relief agency. They'd been working long hours, long enough to get really tired. They were also worried about loved ones, about many practical complications to their personal lives and such.
Could you elaborate about the wing strobes being on or off? What's the procedure/significance? I watch these atc videos, but I'm not quite ready to direct air traffic yet ;)
@@Grubbbee the wing strobes are very bright and flashing lights that are placed on the wingtip that can be seen whether looking from the rear or front of the aircraft. A solid light is difficult to pick out against a background of other solid lights even if it is moving. However flashing lights are much easier for the human eye to spot. I only saw the top mounted beacon light flash but it's just one red light against a sea of very bright runway lights.
@@generalrendar7290 thanks! And do they purposely activate/deactivate them during certain phases of takeoff/, landing/taxiing/etc?
@@Grubbbee it is bad manners to turn your wing strobes on when taxing, because it's painful for other pilots on the ground and makes it difficult for them to navigate. You generally turn them on when you enter a runway but they've been forgotten plenty of times when we've entered the runway. I'd say 10-15% of the time, they've been forgotten about.
Every 20-30 years, we get a very stark reminder what an important job the FAs do….THIS crew was superb. Saved hundreds of lives, including their own…amazing job folks.. From a 121 “upfront” guy. I am personally very proud of your Professionalism.
Thank you…..
Thank you for getting this so quickly. I think everyone should remember to not throw blame at the Coast Guard pilots mistakes happen and there should be external safety systems (like ADS-B or ASDE-X) in place to stop mistakes like this
and I was reading the airport notam. The stop bar lights (traffic red lights at the taxi) from C1~C14 was out of service since December 27 2023. So another safe guard that would prevent this from happening was down. Is like final destination everything went wrong at the same time to cause this to happen.
This reminds me of the accident years ago at LAX where a 737 landed on a Metroliner that was holding on the runway. In that case the controller told the small plane to line up and wait and then lost track of it, and then cleared the 737 to land on the same runway.
Yes. That was in 1991.
Forgotten?
I have to believe that the local reference to Runway 34R as "Runway Charley (C)" will play a role in this accident along with the runway "Hold Short Lights" being shut down for repair and maintenance from taxiways C-1 through C-14. I thought I heard the JCG Dash 8 pilot report to the tower that he was "on Charley" in the ATC audio recording.
It was holding point Charlie (5) - there is no runway Charlie and I never heard anyone say such a thing. 🤷🏻♂️
@@EstorilEm actually in Japan, in certain cases, runways are indeed referred to by the letter of the parallel taxiway. Hence for certain surface ops Haneda will refer to the runways as A, B, C, and D.
@@EstorilEm Yes, they are two distinctly different subjects.
Ture, "Hold Short Lights" being shut down for repair or maintenance from whole taxiways C between from 27 December 2023 to 21 February 2024.
pure negligence!
Was the Dash-8 had already lined up fully on the runway or was it in the progress of entering/turning into the runway upon impact? 🤔
as this happened at night the landing crew had very little chances to see the intruder. You'd think airplane lights would stand out at night but from every image or video i've ever seen an airplane, especially a smaller one, vanishes into the sea of lights that make up a runway and its surrounds. The crew probably would have seen the intruder if it was day time, at least with enough time to make a go around
The landing aircraft would ABSOLUTELY be visible to the Dash-8 as it turned onto the runway. Zero question about that, in fact it was probably very bright - they just didn’t check.
The Dash-8 would have been almost invisible to the A350 though.
Still; that’s your last line of defense. So many things already went wrong by that point.
Dang. So an unexpected runway breach by the coast guard plane, who moved past their cleared holding position. What an unfortunate incident. EDIT: also, I see a lot of people in other comment threads complaining about the fact that 379 survived.
Perhaps it was the stress of delivering relief materials to the disaster area.
C5 stop light had been out for 6 days? If this is true it’s unforgivable!
@@SemiDad I agree
@@SemiDad I would expect that the right seat (copilot) would have checked (by looking starboard) before their plane moved onto an active runway.
consider they had been doing that mission for a day at least. Likely with priority from tower. Also, crew rest will be a major point of the investigation no doubt.
This just reinforced the importance of checking for base, finals, runway clear prior to taking the active. External parties make mistakes, always verify clearances!
We had a similar accident at LAX in 2/1991 between a Skywest SW4 and USAir on RWY 24L. 😢😢😢
Dang. Very sad.
Was reported last night on NBC news that the red light system that indicates the stop/hold position on the runway was not functioning. So perhaps the Coast Guard pilot wasn't familiar enough with that runway to avoid being confused at night about the hold position without the red light working. Possible multiple failures as is often the case.
Apparently that system is NOTAMed U/S for C1-C14
He’s from Japan he’s not a foreigner he flys out of those airports on a regular basis. You don’t become captain without having the time in seat and skills needed to have that rank. Any lights or non working items are relayed to the crew before taxiing to the runway so they knew the lights were out. The video clearly shows he never stopped before ever getting on the runway that’s like not stopping and looking both ways at an intersection. There is no excuse why he ended up on the runway thinking you have clearance and knowing are 2 different things. This guys a professional with thousands of hours at the stick of that aircraft to say he was confused is wrong. The reason they keep showing the transcript is his first officer acknowledged the the hold command since he would have been the one communicating with the tower as the captain maneuvered the plane but the captain is listening to all communications from the tower. They do this everyday so he should have known better.
JA722A is based on Haneda, why would the pilot not familiar with the airport?
@@rigamrts Just premature speculation, obviously I don't have all the details. I've seen reports that the surviving pilot has said he had permission to enter the runway. There was also a notification on Dec 27 that some runway warning system lights were not functioning, but the runway incursion warning system was working and the controller should have seen flashing yellow lights on their displays. However, there's no rule that controllers must be watching the displays at all times. Just passing along tidbits I'm seeing in news articles.
@@rusticcloud3325 Just speculating. Who was the pilot? What was his experience at that airport? It's being reported he is saying he had permission to enter the runway. Also reported the runway incursion system was working and should have alerted the controller with flashing yellow lights on their display. Numerous details I'm sure will be analyzed to piece together the cause.
RIP to the five people who died. So sad that this happened.
Exact same thing happened at LAX in the early 90’s. US Air 737 crashed on top of a commuter plane sitting on the same runway waiting to take off. Controller was found mostly at fault.
For the comments about the stopbar, the stopbar is an extra layer of safety but you rely on it then something else has gone wrong. The blame is not with the stopbar but with whatever gave the pilot the impression that he was cleared to taxi onto the active runway.
No the blame is not with the stopbar, but the stopbar is part of the swiss cheese model.
When it would have worked OK, the accident likely would not have happened.
A system has to be fault-tolerant. If the pilot misunderstood or misinterpreted the taxi instructions the red bar could have prevented him from entering the runway.
Idk how American or Japanese coast guard fly their planes but if their like most …they fly to airports that don’t even have of these precautions. I’d bet good money the airport they were going to didn’t have it or it wasn’t working either .! So yea would it have been nice !? Sure! But let’s be honest it’s a nicety at larger airports and many flights took off that day without it and made it safely.
@@Rob2 No, the stopbar is NOT part of the Swiss cheese model.
The pilots KNEW that was the runway, that’s why they turned 90 degrees onto it and waited! They thought they were cleared onto the active or they never would have done that - all the lights in the world wouldn’t have changed that.
@@EstorilEm What a dumb comment!!!
When the stop bar was lit, even when the pilots thought they were cleared they would have been OBLIGED to re-check with the tower to re-confirm that, telling them the stop bar was lit.
I was always trained to do a clear left , clear right check before entering any runway regardless of the clearance. Not sure how any of the pilots in the Dash missed both the call and taking a look at the approach traffic. Tragic mistakes in airmanship. May the fallen rest in peace.
That's what gets me too - even if you didnt see the aircraft, those lights should've been low enough to see had the Dash-8 flight crew just turned their heads to the right.
Yes youde think they would have had the awareness to know there was just an approved landing on the runway they were being positioned for...
If you look at the layout of that airport, C5 meets 34R at a shallow angle which would have put the approach path in a blind spot almost behind them.
@thomabb no, the C5 taxiway meets runway 34R at perpendicular angle.
As this was a high-speed exit you do not enter the RWY rectangular but in some 30°. In the Dash Eight, the second pilot cannot look back as the wings and engine are in the line of sight.
Various news agencies are now reporting that the Dash-8 was on the runway for 40 seconds before the accident.
When I saw the damage to the nose of the 350 and the fact they lost their front gear completely, it did suggest that they hit the coastguard plane head-on, consistent with it being lined up for takeoff.
Pictures of the front of the 350 taken before it burned show horizontal cut marks across the front of both engine cowlings indicitive of having hit the high wing of the dash 8. The 350 rammed the dash 8 straight on from the rear, but yeah I understand what you mean. Blancolirio channel has the pictures I refer to
The Dash8 is sitting for a while on the runway , the landing light points partly in our direction . When it seemingly starts to strobe , this is the moment the Airbus rams the Dash and moves the whole airplane forwards and downwards . I would say more downwards , landing gear collapse , the angle of the landing light changes .
is the audio quality better in real life ? because without the video transcript text i could not understand anything what was said at all.
Well if you watched the video it was transcripted so you could understand!
Audio in the airplanes is way better that this recording
Yes, my LiveATC receiving equipment is located 13 miles (21 km) away from Haneda Airport therefore the signals are too weak to receive.
Thanks to Victor, he was able to extract any usable audio.
Apart from the receiver, the Japanese accent makes it very hard to understand. Especially for someone like me who is a non-native English speaker. Same like you, without the transcript I wouldn't understand a word.
ATC forgot to instruct Coast Guard pilot to hold short of runway. Tragic.
What strikes me as interesting hearing the comparisons to USA1493 is one of the recommendations made by the NTSB was to turn on the strobe and landing lights before entering the runway (the Metroliner USA1493 hit did not have its strobes on). It appears that the Coast Guard’s strobes were on (can’t tell about the landing lights) yet the JAL pilots still couldn’t see them. It’s why we ought to be revisiting these accidents to see if there’s further learning we can glean. I’m wondering how we can make aircraft more visible on runways in the dark.
RIP victims JA722A
RIP JA722A
RIP JA13JX
Clear the approach end of a runway EVERY FREAKING TIME you take the runway. Turn on ALL OF YOUR LIGHTS before taking the runway. Respect hold short instructions.
Aircraft on the ground not facing you are nearly impossible to see from the air, however, a landing aircraft with landing lights on facing you is pretty much impossible to miss.
This did not have to happen.
@@CrayTom Holding point C5 is before entering the runway.
C5 doesn't meet 34R at a right angle.
@@thomabb It does. Look for updated AIP. C6 is the high speed exit for 16L you might thought of.
I heard one (and only one so far) news report saying that a ‘taxiing red light’ at the hold point was not working at that time. Does that mean the Dash8 pilot simply taxied (incorrectly/subconsciously) until he saw his expected red light that never came? How well lit is the holding point and the runway cross point? A Dash8 forward lighting is not strong, especially for a wide taxi way… am also assuming there no continuous centre line lighting (with or without colour)?
Two day prior the accident was able to see the hangar where the japan coast guard has their planes and helicopters…. Now this happen. Unreal
The Dash 8 mistook "Taxi to holding point" which should be outside the active runway, to "Taxi to position and hold" (occupying the runway for takeoff). That's what I think happened.
They were also told they were number 1 (in sequence for departure, after landing traffic) and could have misunderstood that as line up and wait.
@@chrisschack9716 In either way the are not allowed to enter a runway without beeing told "line up and wait". Also they have read back "Holding Point C5", which can't be on the runway.
Question for Pilots or ATC crew, is the radio quality this poor on board/in your tower? WIthout these transcripts, I'd have absolutely no idea what is being communicated.
No, audio onboard is way better that this recording.
@karlwithak. what? this video is using audio from LiveATC, where most feeds are just someone with a scanner recording the audio they're picking up.
Heck, I'm a pilot and don't have a flipping clue what they're saying. Their accent is way too heavy. Their pronunciation is terrible!!!
@karlwithak.He is a pilot, so he would know if it's better or not.
@karlwithak.You don't know what you're talking about, VAS uses LiveATC recordings, and if you've ever been inside of a flight deck you'd know it's not that bad.
RIP
I think what possibly may have happened was a lapse in understanding from the cockpit of JA722A to breach their holding point, as taking example from passenger planes, the pilot monitoring would be the one speaking to ATC, and the Pilot Flying in control of the aircraft via taxi and takeoff. I believe the pilot monitoring readback correctly, but the pilot flying took this as hold and wait ON 34R.
The other scenario would be that readback was correct and because they were cleared #1, they entered the runway after JAL25 took off believing they were next in queue and lined up ready for takeoff.
I dont know if it's just me, but I CAN NOT understand anything the controllers are saying. I would be constantly saying, "Say Again" I'm used to the radio as a private pilot, but this is horrible!!! Say Again Please!! Continued prayers for the JCG crew families.
As difficult as it is for us to understand, I imagine that it is easier for fellow Japanese who speak the same native language.
In real-life the audio is much clearer. I operate in the region weekly and ATCs English is fine. It's the accent that can be difficult.
On UTube at times I find it difficult to understand US pilots and ATC. European equivalents are the best. Some in the US will disagree, but that disagreement indicates that it’s what your used to and your nationality that’s significant.
All transmissions were in English, but a native speaker of Japanese will understand heavily accented Japanese English much more easily than a native speaker of English. Accent. Pronunciation. Exact word choice. Inflection. All the little details.@@Plutogalaxy
Me too.
And people keep getting into active runways without clearance..
Happened to me at my airport last week. The pilot was told to hold short and just drove onto the runway without a word. Fortunately nobody was on final.
@@bsmith1164Oh, common occurrences, so it seems. The world isn't perfect.
@@Livinginthephils65 it's like running a red light but in aviation world. Very severe mistake to make.
@@ivanjermakov There's no red light on the runway and the holding line probably hard to see at night.
@@andis9076actually runways have red lights and green lights. They’re called stop bars. But it was unserviceable that night for that runway
I don't mean this in a disrespectful way, but i'm surprised anyone can understand what ATC is saying. I'm quite used to aviation radio chatter, but this is next level. Without the transcript on the video, I wouldn't know what they are saying. Although unrelated here, they need to improve thier clear english - it's a safety issue.
I wonder how much the quality of the headset the controller and pilot wears could affect the recording? I worked in a call centre before and spent some of my own money on upgrading the headset I used. The sound clarity improved enormously after the upgrade. Of course, working in an airport and talking to a pilot remotely is very different to working in a call centre, but I am still curious if anyone could shed some insights.
Personally, I can't understand anything (in this video) ATC was saying in English without the subtitles. Try listening to it while looking away.
yes, but this is just a recording from somewhere outside the airport. the audio the pilots and controllers hear is a lot more clear than that. Also Japanese pilots will be used to English spoken with a Japanese accent.
It is incredibly difficult to see if another aircraft is on runway at night when on final approach - the amount of lights and glare from them mask anything unusual. Especially if a big airport with lots of taxiway entry exits.
+ Dash8 got the worst beacon position ever
Although different in some ways, this reminds me of the crash at LAX way back where the private plane was on the runway when the commercial plant hit
looking forward to the CVR as to what was said in the cockpit just prior to the crash...
This was pilot error on the dash 8.. even if the hold short warning lights were not operational they had no clearance to be on that runway. Sadly they won’t be around to be retrained. The tower may not have been unable to see the dash 8 clearly as I think ground radar requires NDSB but someone please correct me if I am wrong. Atlanta got the first ground radar system ASDE-X over a decade ago which will show a target even if aircraft not transponding or equipped with NDSB. Does anyone know if this airport was equipped with any type of ground radar?? If so it may be tower negligence unless there simply was not enough time. Regardless basic flight instruction teaches to look both directions before going onto an active runway and the landing aircraft clearly had their landing lights ON difficult to miss.
The crew could have convinced themselves that Japan Air was inbound for 34L, if they saw them, since the airport was landing both rwys
Another commenter says that Haneda does not have ASDE-X. Also, that was a disaster-response flight two days after a major earthquake. They were working long hours. They were stressed about loved ones and many practical complications in their personal lives... just like ATC was. Not an excuse, but not one person involved in this was operating at their best.
Thank you for posting the actual information. AP news has written that the incident happened on 'Runway C'. A typically ignorant statement from individuals who know nothing about aviation or airport procedures.
Several news outlets are using "Runway C" even after playing the audio that clearly says "runway 34 left". But then they also say people were deplaning onto "the Tarmac", so clearly, they're clueless.
@@crairdin - umm, that’s 34R. That would be your other left!
Actually you're the "ignorant" one (your words) in this case: In addition to the normal ICAO numbering, that runway is also known as "Runway C". I can't post a link but your favorite search engine will confirm that for you.
A quick and simple Wikipedia search mentions that Haneda calls their runway 05/23 "D Runway". I'm guessing that, like Garrett said, this is a local convention, and that some very stressed airport official who was not trained/authorized for PR used that term to a reporter without thinking.
What were you saying about "clueless"? @@crairdin
The audio from the transcript is available on Live ATC and RUclips. Maybe you could add that audio?
So ATC told JA722A to proceed to holding point C5, but are controllers in Japan always supposed to give an instruction regarding the runway when someone is approaching a runway from a taxiway as in "Proceed to holding point C5, hold short of 34R" or is "proceed to holding point C5" considered the instruction to hold short of the runway?
They use the latter. It's an ICAO compatible phrase for that and widely used in Europe as well. Generally, you are never allowed to taxi past the point you are cleared for. And you are never allowed to cross or enter a runway without explicit ATC clearance.
Latter one. I think holding point already means you hv to wait until further clearence to the RWY. For example, ATC will use "Callsign, Juliet holding point J11, 25L" in one of this channel video how VHHH works (ground south). I think "Hold short" of RWY is not mandatory.
so far from all ATC conversations that I have heard everywhere if not all over the world, whenever they say the word “Hold” or “Hold-Short” then it’s always stop somewhere (in front or at a taxiway or runway). Then it’s always “Line up and wait” when giving clearance to move into the runway.
@@skayt35 I would interpret any instructions that didn't give me explicit permission onto or across a named runway and including my callsign as a default hold short instruction, but know sometimes there's a little more room for confusion if non-standard phraseology is used, even if it differs only slightly. Not that it's a chief cause, but wondered if it might be a link in the chain.
So clearly JA722A is not holding short and entering the rwy. We know that with all the runway lights and crew concentrating on instruments and VASI the Dash 8 is not visible.
Very difficult to see an airplane on the runway in night consitions, will all approach lights, runway lights, terminal lights, PAPI, cockpit lights...
@@VASAviation On top of all that the pilots of the approaching plane were busy landing safely and the plane was pointed slightly into the sky - so the blind spot in front of them must have been huge.
Notice that there isn't audio recording on some parts of the transcript like the JA722A.
The last bit of this video showing that huge plane engulfed in the inferno is horrifying. All the passengers evacuating probably hit the top speed of their life that night.
For those who are wondering why the Japanese pilots and ATC in Japan are speaking to each other in English instead of their native tongue it’s because English is the required language for International air travel/airports around the world so cross communication is feasible.
Except Montreal I think. You know the French...
I know native tongue is spoken colloquially between local pilots and ATC all over the world but generally English is the official language. @@ffjsb
In Spain they speak Spanish whenever they can...
And I don't even want to imagine how it is in Russia or China. 😬
@@ffjsb french is optional in Quebec, but english is mandatory.
@@PjotrStroganov I'm well aware of that....
Remember when you were a student pilot and you would visually confirm that no one was on final before taking the runway?
They couldn't see the approach path. Pull up a map of the airport and look at how C5 and 34R meet. C5 is angled for a high speed runway departure for landing aircraft.
@@thomabb no, that's C6. C5 is right next to it and meets the runway at a right angle. cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/212193606314885120/1192150261620285510/image.png
@@thomabb No it's not, C5 is 90 degree entry
@@Nikola16789 The Dash-8 was on the runway one minute prior to the crash....
@@peterebel7899 That means at the time Dash 8 was entering runway, the A350 was roughly 2.5 nautical miles from touch down with landing lights on, taxi lights on, beacon on, nav lights on, strobe lights on... You should be able to see that from 90 degree entry taxiway.
Similar accident in USA involving to small jets. One thought cleared for takeoff that crossed an active runway. Luckily only minor damage to both
Aircraft. High speed collisions allow minimal reaction time
Hello VASAvaition. I would like to use this link to present in ERAU AMNT 265 module2 assignment. will you grant a permission for me as a student of ERAU to use your youtube file? Thank you.
As others pointed out, the CG plane was most likely fully lined up on the runway, unable to see the approaching airliner.
I'm also hearing the CG plane was on a different tower frequency, vs what the airliner was on. Or maybe they were still on ground freq?
You'd think that he would say something if he's lined up on a runway and hears tower clearing another plane to land.
The problem is that according to the transcripts he was never cleared to enter any runway. The last instruction is to taxi to holding point C5, which they acknowledge. Somehow they ended up on the runway, past holding point C5. Very likely he was not aware that he was entering the runway. If the visibility is clear you can most likely make out another aircraft sitting on the runway if their strobes are on. Look like they were slowly rolling onto the runway as the A350 touched down, that's why the Japan Air pilots didn't see the aircraft before.
@@wings4passion His instruction critically did not include the expected words "hold short". He was only cleared to the hold point those words were never said.
Yeah it is clearly not a good practice to give out landing clearances on the tower frequency and direct departing aircraft on the ground frequency.
When the CG plane would be on the tower freqency, he would have received the landing clearance given to the JAL plane and maybe would not have considered his "proceed to holding point" clearance as a clearance to "line up and wait", as seems to have happened.
Also, the JAL plane could have watched closer to what was happening on the runway when they noticed another plane getting such a clearance in front of them, and maybe initiated a go-around.
@@solracer66 Hold short is not normally given outside the US. In Europe you are told to taxi to holding point. The same instruction as given to the coastguard plane. You don't enter a runway unless you get a line up and wait or takeoff clearance or are given a clear instruction to cross the runway.
Taxiway C5 enters at a right angle to the runway. He apparently crossed the hold point without checking or having clearance to enter the runway.
What I cant understand is some people are saying they were to far out onto the runway. Then others saying they (the coast guard plane) was ready for takeoff. Who cleared them for takeoff? The damage to the airbus seems like they landed right on top of them. They are so so lucky they didn't have even more deaths.
FOr now, I found nothing that support the "they were cleared for takeoff" theory. They were told to hold at C5. They didn't.
Lucky that the Dash-8 is small and the A350 is quite big...
Bravo to all of those passengers for not panicking and following the crew member's instructions. Too often we hear stories of some knucklehead slowing things down by trying to get their bags.
No one is talking about the coast guard pilot entering a runway without seeing an aircraft on short final. That was the last chance to prevent this.
The coast guard plane had been on the runway for a full minute when he was struck from behind. He did not pull out suddenly. Also time stamps on the transcript would help to clear this up. The video seems to say the coast guard plane was moving into position when hit but that is not the case.
No one else is mentioning this. And I have missed it myself. Can you tell me how you know this?
@@lukeorlando4814
Search for JA772A + JA516 CRASH EXTENDED FOOTAGE and you will find a ten minute fifty one second video that shows it all. At about the two minute mark you can see the Dash 8 taxing then as he turns onto 34R his landing light comes into view. And he then he just sits there. A few seconds later you see the A350 coming into land and right around the three minute forty seven second mark the collison occurs. Might have to go back and forth a few times to see the Dash but soon you will see.
@@lukeorlando4814 Actually several other sources are mentioning this. See e.g. the video from "Hoover".
Appreciate it
Surely a SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) is to visually check the approach prior to entering any runway. Visibility seems OK so I would have thought the crew member on the right side of the Dash 8 cockpit would have checked prior to entering 34R and seen the A350 (whether he was pilot flying or monitoring). There are however a lot of lights (airport related and others) around the Tokyo Bay area which may have distracted the attention of the "lookout". An extremely sad accident with the consolation that everyone on the JAL flight got out.
Probably not as he entered the runway about 40 seconds before the approaching plane landed. Even if he saw it, from there he may well have assumed that it was lined up for the parallel runway. Once he turned to line up, his fate was sealed unless someone else, plane or tower, could see him and broadcast that, on the right frequency. But nobody did.
Why can you not see the landing lights of the Jal A350?
I am Japanese I heard analysis that there were some kind of custom to prioritize the «plains in noble action »(=meaning military ones they always fly for disaster area to help), so the unfortunate pilot heard C5? the point he had to reach… he actually said thank you, took it as go sign and went on…..
It may have been that "Number 1", clearly departure sequence but not an instruction to enter the runway. Pilots were tired and likely misunderstood it, it's easy enough to read back what you heard but not remember correctly.
I'm wondering about stress/fatigue of the Dash 8 crew -- wouldn't the first officer pilot have normally looked to the right as or before they entered the runway? Wouldn't he/she have seen the Airbus coming in?
Not only that, two pilots missing the clear hold short instruction to begin with is also questionable. I can't make any sense at all of this really without the cockpit voice recording. Intl. airport, disregarding hold short instruction, not monitoring the runway...yeah, the question remains, why?
The Dash-8 was on the runway for nearly a minute, the A350 wouldn't have been visible, even if they did look.
@@utha2665 I thought the video showed a strobe light from the Dash 8 moving onto the runway seconds before impact?
only the CVR can tell what’s happening at that moment. Maybe they are running checklist and the first officer was looking at the list, charts, checking buttons, which distracted him from looking out.
As the FO of the dash 8 didn't survive, we'll never know for certain