NYT reconstruction: Firefighters Likely Had Limited View of Approaching Plane in LaGuardia Crash
Posted by OmicronCeti@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 64 comments
21MPH21@reddit
Ceilings were low that night and it's hard for laymen to judge how fast were traveling. we're emerging out of the clouds and are above the ground (can't use ground items for reference) so it can be difficult to judge.
Still not sure why the driver didn't stop when the cruising lights were red and the tower repeatedly told him to stop. And I wonder what the person in the truck's passenger seat (if there was one) was saying.
rmhoman@reddit
he told him to stop but the first call was for a plane to stop (possible ATC getting flustered) but this all happened after he cleared them to cross, and then a lot of yelling on the radio. The responsibility lies on the ATC IMO as while the passenger in the firetruck might be able to see down the runway how much is obscured by what is in the truck and if any gear that was worn remember these planes are at an angle not plat across. so it might have been above the line of sight or obscured by a door frame or other equipment that they hang from that mounting point. That is why they ask for permission to cross, it was granted then rescinded, but rescinded in chaos.
21MPH21@reddit
Nope. He was talking to Frontier but stopped abruptly. Tower said stop multiple times and truck stop. And if you've ever taxied a plane and you're in a high risk area (like crossing a runway) and ANYONE says stop, you stop. I've told planes to stop, from my jet, and they stop. No callsign just a "stop" and they have. It's the safety culture, better to stop and figure out if it's you they're talking to than to get into a bad situation.
Some to most responsibility does rest on the tower, sure. But, the runway crossing lights went RED. That's always a no-go. Further, like I said, the tower said stop and truck stop repeatedly. The other trucks in the caravan all stopped well short of the runway.
No. Not even close. What do you do for a living?
They asked permission because no one, not a plane, not a ramper, not a firetruck, not airport cops, not even airport ops trucks, cross a runway without permission from the tower.
rmhoman@reddit
Exactly he got permission his reaction time to stop was not in time. But we can not just put this all on the firetruck and the article and others on here saying the truck should have seen it wasn't safe.
21MPH21@reddit
Again, the lights were RED.
My guy, there was about 8-9 seconds of tower saying STOP. Repeatedly. Again, safety culture, you stop when someone says STOP REPEATEDLY FOR 8-9 SECONDS.
I didn't. But the driver shares a lot of the blame. 8-9 seconds. That's a long fucking time.
Again, the lights were red. So yeah.
What was happening in Truck 1 for those 8-9 seconds?
What do you do for a living? You're not a pilot, you're not familiar with airport ops, but you're defending TF out of the 1st firetruck driver (the other firetrucks in the convoy all stopped).
I'm an absolute believer that firefighters can be heros, they do an incredibly dangerous job. But, this time one screwed up and has to take some of the blame.
die_liebe@reddit
Hello, how do we know for sure that that the lights were red?
Maybe the truck did stop, but was already on the runway?
21MPH21@reddit
You know there's video out already, right?
die_liebe@reddit
I see no red lights on the video. It seems to me that at the last moment the fire truck tries to avoid the plane by turning left.
kingrikk@reddit
You can see the alternating flashing red bar clearly on the CCTV video of the incident.
Sure that’s the other side of the runway, but it shows the system was active and no-one has suggested the lights on the other side were faulty.
die_liebe@reddit
Can you link the video, because I am not seeing them.
kingrikk@reddit
https://www.reddit.com/r/CatastrophicFailure/comments/1s1mgcc/22326_cctv_video_of_the_air_canada_accident_at/
die_liebe@reddit
I think that one sees reflections of the emergency lights of the fire fighting vehicles on the wet concrete.
kingrikk@reddit
If you’ve ever seen runway bar lights in operation, you can very clearly see them in that video. Maybe go and look up what they look like and then reassess.
die_liebe@reddit
You obviously don't know the answer.
die_liebe@reddit
What kind of tone are you using?
rmhoman@reddit
Some yes but the way the faa is painting it it is all on the driver. After relistening to the audio. Last time I heard it was 2hrs after the incident you are right he should have stopped. I misremembered the amount of time he had to comply. Makes me wonder if the truck sound under acceleration, Complacency , any other communication in the cab, and radio volume played a role.
sharklaserguru@reddit
If the rule is you can't cross the red lights, even with permission to cross the runway, and they driver ignored that I can't see how this ISN'T entirely on the driver. Yes the tower could have made things easier, but the driver broke a hard rule, so the outcome is on them!
BeeThat9351@reddit
Excellent viewpoint. I see it like DC Army heli collision - dont allow (or create) situations where the only safeguard is a human making a correct assesment and reaction.
21MPH21@reddit
a lot of what we do requires us making correct assessments and reactions. and it usually works out fine. this time just had too many breakdowns.
troglodyte@reddit
This headline is really bad. Their own reconstruction absolutely does not show a "limited view" for the firefighter riding shotgun. It shows a crystal clear line of sight for the passenger seat if the passenger looked down the runway.
They do note that it's possible that another vehicle blocked that view and that the angle meant that the plane may not have looked like it was moving from the angle the passenger seat would have seen it, but neither of those scenarios match the headline.
I straight up hate media coverage of aviation accidents before formal reports come out. This is the New York Times and there are glaring issues with the way this is being presented. I'm not trying to blame the firefighters, but I'm really interested in getting a deeper understanding of how so many safeguards failed-- and some of that, unfortunately, will mean probing how firefighters missed status lights, a visual runway check, and urgent calls to retract the clearance. There's a ton going on at that moment and it's easy to see how a lot could be missed, but it implies we need to rework some of these tools when we can blow through so many layers of safety.
maverick4002@reddit
It said id the firefighter on the right looked out he might see. We do not know if the person did do this or more importantly, was required to do this, so the reporting is fine as is
BigWhiteDog@reddit
When driving fire apparatus, the person sitting right seat is expected to assist in clearing intersections (the call out is "clear right"), especially when entering at an angle. It's actual policy in some fire departments but the airport fire-rescue personnel in this case are cross-trained cops so who knows what their policies and practices are.
CollegeStation17155@reddit
Pretty sure cops follow the same procedure at intersections when running code; right seat calls “clear right” or “Hold”. They may not have to worry about aircraft but being t boned by a semi can ruin your whole day.
BigWhiteDog@reddit
There are rarely two cops in any given vehicle during their normal work assignments so I doubt they have the practice baked in. Cops also rarely slownto check intersections when they have "code 3itus".
JGMcD@reddit
Why on earth is airport fire-rescue being handled by cops? Genuinely curious, not only asking because 1312.
BigWhiteDog@reddit
The New York - New Jersey Port Authority (who is responsible for the airports as well), to save money, uses the "Public Safety Department" model where they hire cops and cross train them as firefighters. There are a handful city public safety departments around the country but it's a bad staffing model because it allows the department to short-staff fire apparatus and then have cops on duty to respond to the incident and work as firefighters. Some of my family used to work for one and the joke was that the department was very good at saving foundations...
JGMcD@reddit
Thanks for the explanation. Indeed, it sounds like a terrible model, so I’m not surprised we’re giving it a go.
AutoRot@reddit
Everyone when crossing an active runway should be aware of potential landing or departing traffic. That’s like rule #1 for driving on an airport.
troglodyte@reddit
I mean, I don't agree with the comment in regards to the quality of the article; I still think it has major issues and is needlessly speculative with a headline that is inappropriate.
BUT: does the passenger have a requirement to help the driver clear an active runway? I don't know the answer to that one. It seems like common sense but it wouldn't be the only time that someone has duties in an emergency that conflict with common-sense safety. Would be an easy change if that was a factor.
redcurrantevents@reddit
That’s not really a valid question though. Do you agree that the driver has a responsibility to make sure the runway is clear? If the driver does, and can’t see out of the passenger side window, then they should be asking their passenger if the right side of the runway is clear, or they should be holding short.
AutoRot@reddit
I come from a flight training background but when I was working on the airport anytime I entered the movement area I was extremely cautious about airplanes. There was a lot of flight training done so my fear wasn’t necessarily that ATC would give a wrong instruction, more that one of the pilots would make a wrong turn. Usually I’d be driving but if happened to be a passenger, I’d always be scanning for hazards, especially when crossing the active.
troglodyte@reddit
Totally makes sense, and I imagine I'd do the same-- but I can also imagine that in an emergency the passenger firefighter may be prepping gear, strategizing how they will attack the emergency, managing communication with other vehicles, etc. Those could all get in the way of them assisting the driver.
BigWhiteDog@reddit
Still supposed to visually "clear the intersection" if the operator's view is impaired. That's more immediate than anything else at that moment.
BigWhiteDog@reddit
In pretty much every fire department I know of it's standard practice, and with some it's policy, for the right seater to assist in visually clearing the intersection. Hell, I even had my ex and my sons doing this for me in civilian life! Clear right!!! 🤣
However, this department is all cross-trained cops so who knows what their policies and practices are.
Ruepic@reddit
I wonder what the outcome of this accident would have been if tower instructed Jazz to execute a go around rather than try and tell the truck to stop.
astroniz@reddit
No time for that.
I'm an atc.
Ruepic@reddit
Not saying I don't believe you, but I talked to some other pilots and they were wondering the same thing. (777 Captain with 40 years of experience)
greatlakesailors@reddit
The plane's crew had already been told the runway was theirs and was clear. They were on a stabilized approach just moments from touchdown.
From that state, the time to - Recognize a runway incursion - Call "go around" - Spool up both engines to TOGA thrust - Start climbing with a positive rate - Gain enough altitude to clear the obstacle Is going to be at least 7 seconds, and probably closer to 15 seconds at best. Assuming the thrust reversers haven't been deployed yet, because once they're open you are committed to landing.
Early accounts are that the CRJ was already wheels down or nearly so when its pilots saw the fire truck cross the line, and they absolutely hammered the brakes right away.
Also, a CRJ simply cannot turn on the ground at high speed. If you try, it'll strike a wingtip and flip over. You have to slow it to taxi speeds before you can deviate from a straight line.
Ruepic@reddit
The NTSB stated truck one was told to stop prior to the wheels touching down.
Ruepic@reddit
The NTSB stated truck one was told to stop prior to the wheels touching down.
reddituserperson1122@reddit
Absolutely not an option.
Ruepic@reddit
I would absolutely appreciate any insight on why it was not an option.
adoggman@reddit
The weirdest part of the article to me is where they talk about how even if they saw the plane they might have not known it was moving towards them.
A plane on a runway pointed in your direction. Gee, I wonder which direction it was moving?
Professional_Act_820@reddit
Then they should not have moved forward onto the active runway
Broad-Lobster7470@reddit
Maybe there should be some form of guidance on a blind corner than. Hell would it be so hard for the driver to have flight radar on on his phone to check where things are in the sky. Better than getting hit by a plane and losing lives.
DCS_Sport@reddit
I wonder how limited their view of the runway status lights were…?
blac_xwb@reddit
Why wonder? They are alive, they should just be asked.
chicouplebj@reddit
Does LGA have status lights at that intersection?
TodaysSJW@reddit
Yes. They were red when the truck crossed.
rmhoman@reddit
but they were given the okay by ATC
DefundTheHOA_@reddit
Wow you definitely don’t know what you’re talking about lol
TheGacAttack@reddit
To cross, you just must receive clearance AND the RWSL must not be red. Both must be true. If given clearance to cross, and the lights are red, the appropriate response is "holding short RW## due to red lights."
That's part of the training, and it's part of the layered approach to safety.
nugeythefloozey@reddit
It looks like the NYT is basically describing this, but with aeroplanes instead of bikes
1320Fastback@reddit
More reason to stop, look and then proceed when it is absolutely known safe.
PDXDeck26@reddit
Yeah but why do that when it's CODE 3 BABY!
Scrota1969@reddit
This might be silly but couldn’t they put some sort of barrier to prevent incidents like this in future? It just seems like lights alone weren’t enough and can’t rely on people looking up and down the runway it seems. Obviously barriers cause issues for planes but something small like bollards that come up and down
Mimshot@reddit
I’m more interested in hearing why the ARFF vehicles weren’t equipped for ASDE-X.
qalpi@reddit
Damn, my Subaru can detect a moving object from 50 feet away. I wonder if they any kind of detection capability.
rmhoman@reddit
yes ATC that has radar, unfortunately they made an error.
lagranwe@reddit
Not according to this FAA doc
airport-codes@reddit
I am a bot.
^(If you are the OP and this comment is inaccurate or unwanted, reply below with "bad bot" and it will be deleted.)
OmicronCeti@reddit (OP)
bad bot
OmicronCeti@reddit (OP)
Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20260417121725/https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/04/16/us/laguardia-plane-crash-fire-truck-why.html
post-explainer@reddit
Please provide a source by replying to the message that was sent to you. Failure to respond to that message will result in the automatic removal of this post. Please feel free to reach out to the mod team through modmail if you have any questions or concerns.
r/Aviation is trialing new measures to prevent karma farming. Please feel free to provide feedback through modmail. Thank you for participating in the community!