United Airlines 767-400 Newark Incident
Posted by ParkingGlittering819@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 634 comments
Credits to Aero News Crew
Posted by ParkingGlittering819@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 634 comments
Credits to Aero News Crew
Ficsit-Incorporated@reddit
I’ll happily wait for the NTSB report along with everyone else but I struggle to see how this could happen without pilot error. It’s a miracle that truck driver wasn’t killed.
Chadwickvonvickter@reddit
I assume this was yesterday. There was a lot of windshear yesterday, so it could just be unlucky timing. They could have been low and got a negative gust, but this altitude should be well outside of stabilized approach criteria.
PugnansFidicen@reddit
I saw the video from the truck interior. It sounds like the plane's engines spool up shortly before impact. So, whether it was error or bad wind shear that put them there, they definitely realized they were too low and tried to correct.
ODoyles_Banana@reddit
Being that low below glide path should've been a go around, not a correction.
notaredditer13@reddit
It is amazing they still committed to the landing.
DaBingeGirl@reddit
Terrifying that they still committed to the landing.
Sasquatch-d@reddit
There’s no glide path for runway 29, it’s an RNAV approach.
jcurve347@reddit
Who is to say that they weren't already attempting to go around, but the wind shear was pushing them down faster than the engines were able to spool up
ODoyles_Banana@reddit
We know they weren't because they did a full stop. If they were on a go around, they might have still hit the truck, but they would have actually gone around. Deciding to go around is a final decision and not something you change once you decide to do it.
jcurve347@reddit
Gooood point - I did not know that. Teaches me for saying stuff...
pheylancavanaugh@reddit
Can you distinguish spool up from "the engine is getting closer to the mic"?
adoggman@reddit
If the ADS-B data is accurate, it was far from stabilized, spending 18 seconds descending at over 1000fpm
DancesWithHoofs@reddit
It’s so simple.
EggsceIlent@reddit
It's a miracle a lot of things didn't go wrong.
Lots of people where feet away from their last day on earth if anything else wrong happened, like shear etc.
NormanQuacks345@reddit
I work in airport engineering/planning and there is now way the airport didn’t know exactly the height of that pole, and also no way they would allow it to be there if it penetrated any of the approach surfaces.
Of course, I’m not an expert, but it sounds like the approach must have been too low.
Wilawah@reddit
The light poles on the section of I95 next to the runway are much shorter than normal.
Obviously designed that way to avoid conflict with aircraft.
douchey_mcbaggins@reddit
Those have gotta be the shortest light poles I've ever seen.
rustyfries@reddit
Similar in Melbourne, AU next to Essendon Airport
This airport mostly handles smaller planes and emergency services. Used to be the main airport before Tullamarine was built.
Kanyiko@reddit
If you look at the Turnpike on Google Streetview, you'll notice these light poles are actually lower than some articulated trucks using the road.
The fact this 767 actually mowed down one of the light poles before overturning the bakery truck shows exactly how low it went. Two feet lower and it wouldn't have left an imprint on the top of the truck - but on the top of the concrete wall running alongside the road.
dammitOtto@reddit
Wait, the truck was overturned??? The reporting, which has been horrendous, did not mention this. But they've mentioned about 650000 times that it's a BAKERY truck, and that the driver had THREE scratches.
ThirdSunRising@reddit
Amazingly they did report that the trailer was ok and the bread was unharmed 🤷♂️
Kanyiko@reddit
My bad there, some of the reporting on the accident was rather confusingly worded.
Kanyiko@reddit
Apparently it did NOT overturn although some initial reporting said it did - my mistake copying that particular report.
Some reports had the cab itself being hit by the landing gear (in a way that the landing gear had bashed out the windows but somehow not hit the driver); others had the truck merely being hit by the light mast that had been snapped off.
Wilawah@reddit
I looked through other days of streetview and found one with a light next to a semi.
They look similar height. Although there is some distortion due to the lower height of the streetview camera.
rokatoro@reddit
Standard semi truck trailer clearance is 13'6" so those lights can't be much more than 15 feet off the ground
Rustique@reddit
Well! I think it's quite a respectable length, yeah! Nothing to be ashamed about!
Public_Enemy_No2@reddit
Its the girth, right?
BeefInGR@reddit
It's the motion in the ocean
donkeyrocket@reddit
Or the landing gear into the bakery truck if you know what I mean.
Potential_Vehicle535@reddit
Girth makes mirth!
I_AM_FERROUS_MAN@reddit
Wow! Really puts into perspective just how low this flight was. Very lucky there wasn't further damage.
Between PAPI lights, radar altimeter, and what looks like decent visibility, I wonder how this crew lost situational awareness so badly.
xixoxixa@reddit
See similar on Texas State Highway 151 just north of the Lackland AFB field.
flactulantmonkey@reddit
Yeah that pilot got like 50,000 points for pulling that one off.
Valuable_County5265@reddit
I wonder why
kallax82@reddit
I wonder how
boulder_problems@reddit
I wonder when
ThirdSunRising@reddit
I wonder who. Who wrote the book of love?
ChronicallyPermuted@reddit
I wonder why be a jerk? We literally all know why they're shorter than usual, that was kind of the point of the original comment, and has no bearing on someone remarking they've never seen shorter ones. Lots of roads adjacent to airports have shortened infrastructure; I drive on one every day to and from work and the light poles are shorter than standard but not that short
Valuable_County5265@reddit
that was not the point of or kind of the point of the comment he was pointing out those were the shortest light poles
Val_Killsmore@reddit
That's that she said 😭
CrotchalFungus@reddit
Kcle had similar on the 28 approach. Same height as the runway approach lights.
tjflex19@reddit
The light poles on Grand Central Pkwy by LaGuardia is the same
leedogger@reddit
427 in Toronto is similar
-Steamos-@reddit
And 404 near butonville airport
stygarfield@reddit
RIP YKZ
MC_ScattCatt@reddit
Several in the Dallas area are like that. It does look funny when you’re driving along. At love field they used to (maybe still do?) have the lights like little bollards that shine down on the road.
planenut767@reddit
At least the Turnpike Authority knows what they're doing. The Port Authority of NY/NJ, not even close
ThirdSunRising@reddit
“ if you hit this pole, you will hit that truck”
JimmyisAwkward@reddit
Did they… mount ALS to the tops of the poles lmao??
Jazzlike_Climate4189@reddit
Sure looks like it haha
Inspi@reddit
Definitely. A park near an airport in my area was denied putting new lights up for a sports field. Before the park, the same lot had a massive stadium with towering lights, and apparently that was just fine. But the new park with regular street light height lights that are maybe 1/2 the height of the old stadium? Total violation.
nomadschomad@reddit
The plane also hit a bakery truck on the perimeter road.... This wasn't even close.
grackychan@reddit
That is the same truck depicted.
mkdz@reddit
I have drunkenly asked and received bread from a worker from this bakery at 2 o'clock in the morning lol
the_silent_redditor@reddit
I’m drunk rn do they deliver to Australia?
nomadschomad@reddit
As long as you don't mind fishing it out of the wheel well...
Glum-Ad7761@reddit
Do they deliver the kind of bread that features pictures of dead presidents????
Terrh@reddit
I was wondering why the "lightpole" sure looked a lot like a semi truck to me.
Slice5755@reddit
Wait a minute Grack. Are you sure. If you look at the video with bloke in the bakery truck, it passes from his right to his left. You can even see him watching the direction as he notices the plane coming in low.
In the OP image, the plane is going left to right* of the truck.
railker@reddit
He's looking towards the passenger side, but in the one frame before the camera goes blurry:
- all the pixels of the inside of the truck shift towards the passenger side, as if the impact's coming from the driver's side
- you can see the leading edge of the wing and slats on the front/road view of the truck, coming from the left
After that you can't otherwise tell what direction it passes from in the video as there's too few frames, you only see landing gear for 1 frame and aircraft for 1 frame.
grackychan@reddit
Nice analysis here. It's obvious he is going southbound (cranes of Port Newark Elizabeth to the left) , RWY 29 to the right. The aircraft must have impacted from the direction of approach.
He may have looked the other way because of other reasons, or just confusion where the loud sound of the engine is coming from (it's hard to tell when the jet is about to be overhead), or even acoustic reverb off the concrete barrier to the driver's right.
Yccct@reddit
The plane is coming from drivers left in the cab video - you can see the landing gear in a couple of frames flash by his left side (right side in the video) just before he gets hit.
penywisexx@reddit
I think that’s the nose gear you see, he was probably hit by the right main landing gear. If the nose gear had hit him the main landing gears likely would have been even lower and hit the concrete wall resulting in the plane crashing.
noncongruent@reddit
If the driver was reacting to anything related to the airplane he might have heard the engines being reflected off the concrete wall to his right, and it's possible the larger surface area of that wall made the plane's engines louder coming from his right than the direct sound from his left. If his passenger window was rolled down and the driver's window up that would have amplified the difference.
nomadschomad@reddit
Yes, it is. Which is why it is extra weird that the headline doesn’t mention it.
Popular-Web-3739@reddit
The same plane?
nomadschomad@reddit
Yes
fumar@reddit
I thought that was the pole the plane hit.
nomadschomad@reddit
There is dash Cam and Driver Cam From inside the truck. It got walloped.
2_Shoesy@reddit
Walloped by the plane or the falling pole?
mike32659800@reddit
Walloped by the plane. The pole hit a Jeep.
1776cookies@reddit
I want to see a photo of that truck.
mike32659800@reddit
So, you dont believe the plane hit that truck?
Quick search online. Look at the video here:
https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/video/united-airlines-flight-strikes-light-pole-and-truck-on-new-jersey-turnpike/
1776cookies@reddit
That does not show the exterior condition of the truck that was hit.
fishy_sticks@reddit
It’s literally the picture OP posted.
nomadschomad@reddit
But the headline in the photo doesn't mention it and OP didn't note it in the caption. Garbage all around.
nomadschomad@reddit
The plane hit the truck
ModelingDenver101@reddit
where is a picture of the truck afterward?
railker@reddit
Lots of people thought that based on absolutely nothing at all except "well the plane can't have touched the truck it would've destroyed it", alongside "a highway light pole and tear a wheel off the landing gear, it must have done that."
DancesWithHoofs@reddit
Pole is a nationality according to my elders.
owa00@reddit
But how many hundreds of feet tall was the bakery truck?!
nomadschomad@reddit
Just enough
Historical-Edge-9332@reddit
The pilot just wanted to clap them buns
NormanQuacks345@reddit
I mean yeah seems pretty cut and dry but I didn’t want to make any definitive statements.
arroyobass@reddit
LAX recently had to deal with this same problem with the new metro line. The metro was going to be too high so it needed to go into a tunnel through the approach path. Looks to be a similar height to the road in this case.
tikkamasalachicken@reddit
The PAPI lights likely read medium rare
ZBBYLW@reddit
Dude, the PAPIs were so rare it was still running in the field.
Ficsit-Incorporated@reddit
I think the PAPI probably read more like tartare in this case.
BelethorsGeneralShit@reddit
The thing in question would be the approach surface - one the five imaginary surfaces included in FAR part 77. It begins 200' beyond the runway threshold and has a slope of 50:1 on a precision runway, so for every 50' it extends, the allowed height increases by one foot.
planenut767@reddit
You've never dealt with the Port Authority of NY/NJ🤣. It's a political patronage pit organization that people in power send their incompetent cousins too because they need a job. Even the ones hired without hookups are some people of questionable character. My source? I was raised by one😅
railker@reddit
Is there a difference between the approach surfaces and the obstruction surfaces? I imagine that's the margin between the centerline "on glideslope" line and the actual obstruction clearance line?
I thought nothing was allowed in either of those, but another airport management bloke noted you can absolutely have stuff in the zone. From the FAA, "Obstructions are objects that infringe upon the obstruction standard surfaces in [Part 77]. Often obstructions that do not affect flight operations are not determined hazards to navigable airspace; however, they are included in the Obstacle Authoritative Source database and typically require marking and/or lighting to increase conspicuity to pilots." For which in that OAS there's a bunch of entries for poles down the GPS coordinates of the turnpike, and we can see in StreetView they are lighted.
Tauge@reddit
Something I'm curious about... On a normal approach, what is the expected altitude for that approach? Or range of altitudes? Like... There's a difference between, this 'plane flew a suicide approach and hit something' vs 'this plane was too low because they made a mistake or encountered some random wind change'.
I'm not saying any of those things happened, its just... To my mind, if a plane is supposed to be at 100' above a road, is different than if it is supposed to be 50'... Is this a 1 a million event or a 1 in a billion event?
Or to put it another way... Should the runway threshold be moved?
RocknrollClown09@reddit
I fly out of EWR and the Stadium visual to runway 29 is pretty sketchy. You roll out on final in a descending turn at 500’, and you can’t see the PAPIs until you’re on final (they’re blocked by buildings). The threshold displacement is about 200’, so I’d bet everything about this approach is right at all the legal limits, which doesn’t allow for much error.
Compound that by the fact 29 is a relatively short runway that they only use when there are strong west winds usually causing a bad crosswind component, and I can absolutely see how this all happened.
External_Rest6861@reddit
The light poles are indeed below the non-precision approach TERPS surface to Runway 29.
PigSlam@reddit
It’s either that, or someone snuck in and put poles in the wrong place without telling anyone.
MurrayPloppins@reddit
Sounds like the approach must have been too low? Yeah I mean it hit something.
NormanQuacks345@reddit
Okay but I mean as opposed to the pole being in a place it shouldn’t be
snafu0390@reddit
Oh the airport obviously knows the height of those poles. However, on the charts for RWY 29 there is a note stating that “34:1 is not clear” meaning obstacles do actually penetrate the visual segment evaluation surface. Now, 34:1 is significantly less than the standard 3° glide path so they were 1000% too low but there are known obstacles.
beerme04@reddit
I've driven this road many times. They come in low over you but I've never seen one even close to this low.
PipsqueakPilot@reddit
I was an expert and if a plane hits a street light, the plane is too low.
Mendeth@reddit
I’m not an expert either, but I don’t believe the highway counts as the touchdown zone.
Suspicious-Bowl6249@reddit
If it was night time the papi lights would’ve been screaming red red red red
wade822@reddit
PAPIs are visible during the day too.
beastpilot@reddit
They're on during the day too and scream almost as loud.
pattern_altitude@reddit
PAPIs also work during the day
Bake2727@reddit
This!
icancounttopotatos@reddit
Better wait for the report to make sure the bakery truck wasn’t flying too high
HorsieJuice@reddit
They said it was from Baltimore, but $5 says it had Virginia plates.
I_AM_FERROUS_MAN@reddit
These dang ground vehicles need Transponders! /s
Hairy_Improvement_51@reddit
Because they were baked
Different-Page7001@reddit
This reminds me of Indian Airlines 491, which struck a truck while failing to get airborne. The truck driver had to call the owner, who angrily replied "Were you flying?!"
NarrMaster@reddit
His tires were too inflated.
He hit a pothole and got into a plane accident.
Shackletainment@reddit
The casualties could have been much more than just the truck driver
tahlyn@reddit
Wait, did the truck driver die? That's sad.
anamexis@reddit
No. "Casualty" means someone injured or killed.
tahlyn@reddit
Makes sense. I'm used to it being just deaths so I was confused since I thought he had survived. Thanks!
Ficsit-Incorporated@reddit
Absolutely. Fifteen feet lower and numerous highway vehicles, the aircraft, and everyone aboard those vehicles could have been lost.
NYPuppers@reddit
Weird choice to put the aircraft before the people on board in this list! lol
ThePrussianGrippe@reddit
It’s listed in order of demise. The passengers aren’t surviving if the plane doesn’t survive.
Pr_cision@reddit
That’s the logical way to list it in that scenario. I don’t think he’s listing it in terms of which is worse
UPnAdamtv@reddit
No no no. You always list things based off the personal impact of you specifically, the personal impact of people like you, then the personal impact of anything else.
You see. This means: traffic (I could have been that truck!), passengers (I could be a passenger!), aircraft (I can’t be aircraft.)
Get your logic and reasoning crap out of here.
Pr_cision@reddit
Don’t put yourself down like that, I am sure you can be an aircraft one day
UPnAdamtv@reddit
You really think so?! I’ve been trying since childhood.
BentGadget@reddit
Fifteen feet lower and numerous highway vehicles, all the people aboard the aircraft, and the aircraft itself could have been lost.
Im_Balto@reddit
That video from the truck is pretty horrifying
I cannot wait to read what possibly led to this kind of fuckup
Zhirrzh@reddit
That truck video is both nightmare fuel and, because he lived, fuel for belief in miracles and divine grace. One second driving normally. Next second a plane tries to take your head off out of nowhere. But you live. Holy mixed messages.
mj2323@reddit
Link?
Im_Balto@reddit
https://www.wesh.com/article/united-airlines-newark-landing-streetlight-truck-incident/71200113
Individual_Author956@reddit
As the NTSB would say, pilot error is not the cause, it’s the consequence of systemic failure.
ArctycDev@reddit
The only answer is pilot error... It's a right hand turn into a visual with like 1 mile to the runway. Really not the best approach for safety, but in the end, flown too low by the PF.
UniqueIndividual3579@reddit
The CVR will be interesting.
Ficsit-Incorporated@reddit
That’s if it’s released to the public. No guarantees it will be. But I sure hope so.
LorenOlin@reddit
Hell another 10 feet lower and everyone on that plane is probably dead too.
dinanm3atl@reddit
Just a VFR pilot having fun. Going on fun trips. Saving time versus flying. Etc.
But wouldn't an airliner be spitting out warning of being way too low?
netarchaeology@reddit
Its a miracle the bread wasn't even affected. The statement from the bread company said the trailer wasn't broken and thr product was safe.
This is the closest of calls. I dont think you could get any closer than this.
ZBBYLW@reddit
Only in America are we worried about the product.
enduserfeedback@reddit
That bread was on this aircraft’s next flight.
strangemedia6@reddit
I would say it’s also a miracle that a plane hit a ground object while airborne and still managed to land safely.
Budget-Stomach-5227@reddit
4 reds your dead.
Correct_Inspection25@reddit
Microbursts? https://pilotinstitute.com/microbursts/
Ficsit-Incorporated@reddit
On a cool, sunny day? Affecting one and only one aircraft? It’s not impossible, but Occam’s razor applies.
Correct_Inspection25@reddit
You seemed to be asking for any way other than pilot error, microbursts can happen on sunny days called dry microbursts, and are usually very brief (especially on sunny days) like 5 mins.
Anecdotal have experienced a go around on a sunny day as a passenger on approach/landing.
Not saying that is what happened here, but have experienced them, clearly local monitoring and black box data would quickly rule that out.
Substantial-Low@reddit
It is a miracle everyone on the plane wasn't killed.
Dave_DBA@reddit
Having said that, weather can be a bitch.
Polka1980@reddit
They will be investigating if Tony Hawk was piloting because that is a perfect truck grind.
DDS-PBS@reddit
This is precisely why you don't want to try to land on the numbers.
elvenmaster_@reddit
There's always more than one reason. It could be with a faulty ILS + overloaded ATC (seems it's the new fassions in air traffic safety, in the US) + tired crew.
FreeOmari@reddit
29 doesn’t have an ILS approach, it’s RNAV. Don’t think this has anything to do with ATC either, they don’t control the descent slope on approach.
3417-@reddit
And two visuals (bridge visual RWY 29) and (stadium visual RWY 29).
CatInAPickleSuit@reddit
It's a miracle they didn't end up like Asiana
Basic_Chemistry9499@reddit
Their shift included one takeoff and one landing and they couldn't do that correctly.
Raise-Emotional@reddit
Maybe they've had a lot of rain and the pole grew ?
Naa pilot error.
NYPuppers@reddit
It's a miracle people on the plane weren't killed.
UnhingedCorgi@reddit
Extremely lucky they didn’t crash I think.
pup5581@reddit
uhh this is probably 10 ft away from people dying or a hull loss
CommonRequirement@reddit
1ft. Watch the truck video
njsullyalex@reddit
Poor truck driver. I’m glad he wasn’t badly hurt.
HarpersGhost@reddit
https://www.wesh.com/article/united-airlines-newark-landing-streetlight-truck-incident/71200113
Minor injuries, although I'm sure he's sore as hell for several days.
Any-Worldliness-679@reddit
That's ok. He can sleep in for the rest of his life, if he's at all smart.
chaosattractor@reddit
I wish court cases were as easy to "win" as y'all think
Any-Worldliness-679@reddit
Remember when I said it would be easy?
Me neither.
BassWingerC-137@reddit
Morgan and Morgan and Morgan and Morgan will have Spirit Air reborn and named Bread Van Man.
mj2323@reddit
Jesus
JasonIsFishing@reddit
Yeah they owe him a first class upgrade on his next United flight
frostrambler@reddit
Do they still break guitars or only trucks now.
JasonIsFishing@reddit
Dude. They made me gate check my first great guitar (Martin D-28). The flight wasn’t even full. They managed to break the headstock without even damaging the case. I didn’t know that was even possible!
I will have no sympathy for UA when they write that trucker’s settlement check.
frostrambler@reddit
Yeah I mean you heard of this right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YGc4zOqozo
njsullyalex@reddit
First class on United for life more like it
scotsman3288@reddit
A few feet and that truck is completely gone yes, but not sure about landing and hull loss. 10 feet and that plane is gone....
nd4spd1919@reddit
I dunno, if the trailer had a steel frame, I think there's a good chance some hydraulic lines are damaged, a number of wheels are torn off, and possibly some impact damage to the lower part of the struts. Without any time to go around, I think there would have been a decent chance one side ends up digging hard into the runway and at the very least drags it off into the grass.
Telvin3d@reddit
I suspect that the landing gear getting embedded in a truck, which then hits the concrete wall, would have a pretty similar outcome to the gear just hitting the wall itself
imapilotaz@reddit
Yeah, itd instantly lower the nose uncontrollably and we end up with a flaming hole in the ground
ThaddeusJP@reddit
If it tears some of the gear off and lands with out all the wheels it could have skidded off the runway, into the dirt, and cartwheeled.
scotsman3288@reddit
I'm just saying we don't know the damage a cube van would do to the gear, but we do know what a concrete wall would do. I've driven many cube vans and they have the iintegrity slightly better than an Amazon box.
SeaCounter9516@reddit
It did hit the truck
imapilotaz@reddit
Yeah 6 inches lower and it drags the truck with them, dropping the nose straight down and leaving a flaming wreckage on the runway.
This was virtually as close as possible but still being not a fatal accident.
mj2323@reddit
You have a link to it?
Tyler_holmes123@reddit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Airlines_Flight_491 Although not during landing, but this plane had its landing gear and engines severed when it collided with a truck going on a highway. There was huge loss of life.
Just_a_Berliner@reddit
This comparison just doesn´t work. Not only because it was at Take-Off rather than landing, but alsobecause everyone invvolved was seriously incompetent.
I think that the AA MD-80 that clipped the hills off Hartford, CT in the 1990s is much more appropiate for that.
Umair1145@reddit
While giving it a read: The official accident report recorded their interaction for posterity: after learning that the truck had been struck by an airplane, the owner derisively replied, “Were you flying!?”
Bro! Wtf!
Any-Worldliness-679@reddit
Doesn't get much less competent than this United Airlines crew, fyi.
Just_a_Berliner@reddit
I mean it was according to ADS-B and METAR, a very windy and relative unstable approach by a probably otherwise competent crew with some Get-there-itis. Similar to the AA crew in Hartford.
Any-Worldliness-679@reddit
There is no excuse for this, period.
Source: over 30yrs as airline pilot, including the airplane type in question
Brambleshire@reddit
One could say the United pilots here were seriously incompetent
Tyler_holmes123@reddit
Agreed . My comparison was just to convey how dangerous too low takeoff / landing over a highway can get with serious consequences.
ArsErratia@reddit
Had it been a bus or coach instead of bagels, someone probably would have.
distantreplay@reddit
That light pole looks surprisingly like a semi truck full of bread.
skinte1@reddit
The planes wheel did not hit the cab of the truck. It hit a lamp post that in turn fell into the driver window (and possibly the top of the trailer). Look at the photo in this post. The wheels of the plane are no where nere the cab window that got smashed in the driver POV video...
Boxerocks08@reddit
Take another look at that picture, the left side wheels are very clearly exactly at the cab of the truck, and are clearly below the front of the trailer. You can also see the wheels through the driver's side window of the truck in the dashcam video, in the last couple frames before it hits.
skinte1@reddit
No they are not... the lowest wheel on the left side landing gear is still nowhere near the windshield level of the cab (which is significantly lower than the top of the trailer) Also why don't you take a look at the new pictures of the truck which clearly show the light damage from the pole in the middle of the windshield...
avboden@reddit
Photos of the truck, pole and plane have now been released. Very clear the plane hit the pole and the pole hit the windshield of the truck. There's one tiny scuff on the tire but that's it.
Pole caused pretty solid gash on the plane too.
penelopiecruise@reddit
Feedback on the yoke is very similar to
Tiny-Plum2713@reddit
to what?
undiLEwa@reddit
I think they probably meant “too”
penelopiecruise@reddit
sorry, hit bread truck while typing...
undiLEwa@reddit
😂
SkyeMreddit@reddit
That was literally inches from taking out the truck entirely! The poles are very short and covered in aircraft warning lights right there for that reason
taveanator@reddit
This is the spot, right?
mb2231@reddit
I mean I'm not a pilot so I'm not sure what landing on 29 at EWR is like, but the touchdown zone is about 1600 feet from where that truck was hit so there should've been more than enough clearance
MrBifflesticks@reddit
Yes, but it's a pretty short runway and some people can get intimidated by it. This might cause some pilots to want to dip below the glideslope to give them a little more landing distance. I'm not sure if that's what happened here though, it's an unusual approach and in my experience it's most often used when there are strong/gusty winds from the west.
Drunkenaviator@reddit
For a 764 it's a VERY short runway. I would seriously consider the 30kt crosswind on 22 vs 29 in a heavy -400. And the -400 lands like ass in a crosswind.
plhought@reddit
You know the headwinds slow the aircraft down relative to the ground, and reduce the landing distance required...
It's not a short runway. It's completely within the performance capabilities and certification requirement of the aircraft.
Drunkenaviator@reddit
Yeah, what do I know? I just fly the fuckin' thing for a living.
plhought@reddit
Sure yeah do.
ic33@reddit
Dude is just a regular here who has posted for like a dozen years about experiences in the 747 and 767. All set up elaborately for this moment where he could "pretend" to be a 767 pilot and say that he might prefer a crosswind to a headwind on that very short runway.
plhought@reddit
6500+ isn't "very short". Especially with a 30ish KT headwind.
It's always easy to be Captain Hindsight in this industry.
Sorry, I disagree. 47/67 captain or not.
ic33@reddit
This would have been a better initial response, maybe with just a little less acerbic tone.
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
Going below the glideslope intentionally in a jet is madness, even more so in a widebody.
iampiolt@reddit
It’s the entire approach, not just the landing. It’s always atop the list of unstable approaches because it’s really wonky visually, it’s a tight squeeze for the rnav depending on the bird, and it’s rarely used at EWR.
railker@reddit
About 1,675 feet to the centerline of the PAPI lights, which are down the far end of the touchdown zone markers. Little pythagoras and 3-degree glideslope gives us ... 87 feet at the closest lane of the turnpike (from the runway surface). That turnpike lane is at least 6 feet higher than the runway, plus the wall and poles. Little tighter than I would've thought.
SkippytheBanana@reddit
This runway and approach was tight for a ERJ-145. It was sporty flying it becuase you get way close to everything. Bridges, cars, light poles, etc on a shortish runway. Plus 29 is really only used when the winds are howling you makes it rough as crap while trying to fly it.
MacSergey@reddit
if you look at google maps you can see that the first tire marking on the runway are only 250m from the road what means planes regularly fly here little over 10m over the road what means only few meters above trucks.
astroamy24@reddit
A Boeing Airport Planning document for the 767-400 shows that the minimum landing distance for a dry runway at sea level, minimum weight with no reverse thrust, and zero wind is about 5800 feet. Max weight is 6200 feet. There’s margin built in to those numbers, but with runway 29 being 6725 feet TOTAL, the pilots almost certainly have to attempt to land before the 1000 foot markers. It looks like the winds around the time of the incident were straight down the runway, coming from 290 but 19 knots gusting 30 is not a situation I’d want to be in.
This is speculation, I’m not a professional pilot and I imagine I got some things wrong.
sq_lp@reddit
Generally those landing numbers include crossing the threshold at a specific height and aiming for the thousands plus an extra safety margin. Not landing on the threshold.
And at least on the 777, the company calculated distances do not include thrust reversers either. Might be the same for the 767. Not sure.
Sir_Sir_ExcuseMe_Sir@reddit
Wait, is a 767 really landing on runway 29?
WeeblsLikePie@reddit
yeah this sounds like the problem would have been solved with an "unable" call on the radio.
JJsjsjsjssj@reddit
unable to what?
lsthrowaway69@reddit
Unable to land on 29 I assume?
definitelyainoreally@reddit
the piano keys are like 350ft from the elevated freeway
Emily_Postal@reddit
I think that’s it.
NYPuppers@reddit
just based on a few anecdotes I have heard from pilots on this approach / departure, more than i would care to know.
Steeps5@reddit
Just looking at satellite view, I think the picture is the east end of the runway.
SteveJB313@reddit
Are there any photos of the truck's damage? I can't find any, curious what the impact looks like.
asad137@reddit
Based on the video from the truck, it seems like it was pushed onto its side
QuarterlyTurtle@reddit
More pics have come out, the truck didn’t flip, and potentially the wheels didn’t even touch the truck itself. The footage is so violent because the wheels broke a light pole off just before, which then toppled and smashed down right into the windshield of the truck where the dashcam was mounted.
asad137@reddit
Ah gotcha, thanks!
Prestigious-Skin4391@reddit
It also hit the truck in the photo
JamesonTee@reddit
There's a dashcam video of the plane hitting the truck, here. Pretty terrifying.
https://cbsaustin.com/news/nation-world/plane-wheel-crashes-into-bakery-truck-on-nj-turnpike-driver-survives-with-cuts-schmidt-federal-avaiation-administration-port-authority-new-york-new-jersey-bread-video?teaserSource=trending
Skyhawkson@reddit
Is it getting hit by the plane or hit by the lightpole that was hit by the plane?
memebase_blows@reddit
Light pole but still.
Prestigious-Skin4391@reddit
No it hit the truck, go watch the 5+ links in this thread
memebase_blows@reddit
Light pole but still.
Edit:
You all convinced me but I was still right.
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/s/NJJxCKeDEM
Mellanies_Redemption@reddit
This is incorrect. The lightpole hit a Jeep, but the truck was hit by the plane itself. It's literally in the picture at the top of this post.
memebase_blows@reddit
I stand corrected I just saw the new video and … holy shit…
wolfydude12@reddit
Per the same article that you are directly replying to:
Skyhawkson@reddit
Thanks, missed it. Still having my morning coffee.
hoofglormuss@reddit
i'm still learning to read
JamesonTee@reddit
It was the wheel. I corrected my comment accordingly.
SeaCounter9516@reddit
You can see the landing gear in his window at the last second
whiskeytown79@reddit
Holy shit.
QuarterlyTurtle@reddit
No it didn’t. You can see from this image that it didn’t, the tires are way above the cab windows, they even clear the roof of the truck, just barely. The wheel stuck and broke off a taller light pole which then fell and smashed into the windshield of the truck.
ThirdSunRising@reddit
It doesn’t get any closer than that. Someone buy that driver a lottery ticket
NecessaryMeeting4873@reddit
That didn’t happen.
From both the image in OP showing well on top do the trailer not the cab as well as video showing the truck is standing upright after the incident.
Patrick Oyulu's video - https://x.com/patrickoyulu/status/2050998033341440212?s=20 If you watch Patrick's video (left video full screen) showing the plane landing, you see a damaged lamp post (with the lamp component missing). Additionally if you skip to the very last second/frame of his video right before it cuts off, you see the back of a trailer with the logo for Northeast Foods still upright.
Prestigious-Skin4391@reddit
Lmao bruh…. There’s in cab video of it happening…. It’s been posted 5+ times in this thread alone.
NecessaryMeeting4873@reddit
Then what’s about the image in the post? Wheels are above and behind driver’s cab. How do you explain that?
How do you explain an aircraft wheel (much larger than a sedan or truck wheel) traveling at 150 knots striking the driver cab and driver has minors injuries?
How do you explain the truck still standing upright after the fact?
AdoringCHIN@reddit
Do you think the cab just randomly exploded on its own?
skinte1@reddit
The planes wheel did not hit the cab of the truck. It hit a lamp post that in turn fell into the driver window (and possibly the top of the trailer). Look at the photo in this post. The wheels of the plane are no where nere the cab window...
NecessaryMeeting4873@reddit
The cab is in the direct;y behind the jet wash from the #1 engine after the aircraft flew by.
Prestigious-Skin4391@reddit
Bruh you need a tin foil cap at this point lmao
NecessaryMeeting4873@reddit
Bruh is right.
Seems like you are ignoring:
1.) video evidence from Patrick’s post showing truck is up right after the fact.
2.) Patrick's comments that truck tires blew (you would think witness who was there would have mentioned something more serious that tires blowing).
3.) image evidence from in this OP aircraft wheels and both above and behind driver’s cab
4.) as well as laws of physics.
whiskeytown79@reddit
...including right in the comment I was replying to.
Prestigious-Skin4391@reddit
Right! I don’t understand how people could be so smooth brained to say it’s fake lmao
skinte1@reddit
Who said it's fake, lol. The guy just said the planes wheel did not hit the cab of the truck. It hit a lamp post that in turn fell into the driver window and possibly the top of the trailer. Look at the damn photo in this post. The plane tires are no where nere the cab window.
SeaCounter9516@reddit
You can see it in the video at the last second. Insane
skinte1@reddit
The planes wheel did not hit the cab of the truck. It hit a lamp post that in turn fell into the driver window (and possibly the top of the trailer). Look at the photo in this post. The wheels of the plane are no where nere the cab window...
donkeyrocket@reddit
So glad that the driver is mostly unscathed here but can you imagine doing something awkward prior to this? A video of you picking your nose or saying you're about to shit your pants is now everywhere.
JamesonTee@reddit
Haha! Thankfully just some off-key singing.
ATCHOOOOOO@reddit
That's insane he only suffered minor injuries. Hoping he gets a well deserved pay check for this, holy shit.
NecessaryMeeting4873@reddit
Whether it actually hit the truck is in question because the truck is still standing upright after this.
Patrick Oyulu's video - https://x.com/patrickoyulu/status/2050998033341440212?s=20 If you watch Patrick's video (left video full screen) showing the plane landing, you see a damaged lamp post (with the lamp component missing). Additionally if you skip to the very last second/frame of his video right before it cuts off, you see the back of a trailer with the logo for Northeast Foods. https://www.nefoods.com/ is the largest supplier for buns/rolls.
Prestigious-Skin4391@reddit
Dawg you just keep posting false info when there’s videos all over showing the wheel hitting the truck
NecessaryMeeting4873@reddit
I’ve seen that video frame by frame full screen.
The video doesn’t show wheel striking the driver cab.
The wheel appears in the cab window but if you advance another frame, you see the wheel is no longer in the interior dashcam image.
The image in this post show all aircraft wheels are above the trailer which in itself is higher than the driver’s cab while also behind the driver cab.
street593@reddit
You know there are two sets of landing gear right? The one that comes into frame is the right landing gear. The left landing gear hits the cab and is never visible in the dashcam.
NecessaryMeeting4873@reddit
The image clearly shows both sets of wheels above the trailer.
The wheel can't be 3-4 feet lower than the trailer roof to strike the driver's window and then be above the trailer in the image above.
What would explain the dash cam vibration would be the jetwash from #1 engine. The cab would be in the jet wash.
Prestigious-Skin4391@reddit
You are arguing with yourself my guy, nobody’s taking your 2 cents, it’s just funny to see how much you think your correct, so when the NTSB report comes out and says it hit the truck I’ll still be laughing at your opinion
NecessaryMeeting4873@reddit
I wrote the following:
I didn’t write it didn’t strike the trailer.
NartFocker9Million@reddit
Anyone else catch the truck driver's surprisingly nonchalant "Oh shit!" AFTER getting hit?
WorryNew3661@reddit
Holy fuck
ModelingDenver101@reddit
where is the aftermath of the truck?
LetterToAThief@reddit
Holy shit. That is horrifying
HolyCowAnyOldAccName@reddit
United coming in hot like
chunkymonk3y@reddit
Bro there’s dashcam footage of the truck/driver getting clipped by the plane it’s blowing up on social media
Prestigious-Skin4391@reddit
Yeah it’s pretty wild, the driver is very lucky to be alive, hoping and praying he makes a full recovery
jalabi99@reddit
...and it clipped a bakery truck, sending it flying.
Miraculously, the driver got off with only minor cuts and bruises.
Footage from inside the truck at the moment of impact courtesy of WABC-Ch. 7 (New York).
skinte1@reddit
It did not. It clipped the light pole which in turn got flung into the side of the driver cab including the camera mounted there. The truck did not tip over.
QuarterlyTurtle@reddit
Don’t know why this was downvoted, because it’s accurate. Theres pictures of the truck upright and the only damage is a long smashed in chunk of the windshield from the light pole falling onto it.
cloudsmiles@reddit
It hit a freaking truck.... why do all these headlines say "lightpole"
taebsiatad@reddit
Bc apparently the plane hit the light pole, which knocked off a wheel/tire, and the wheel/tire is what hit the truck.
QuarterlyTurtle@reddit
No the plane hit a light pole, which broke the light pole, and that’s what smashed into the trucks windshield. The plane’s landing gear is fine minus a little mark on the tire from the light pole.
D-VO@reddit
That thing was 10 feet from having the gear ripped off by the concrete wall... holy shit.
GreenDevil97@reddit
There has to be a video sooner ot later…
BAMyouhavetheclap@reddit
There is, from the inside of the semi truck it hit on its what down
ThirdSunRising@reddit
I was disappointed in that footage. You never see what hit him. You see him driving along, and you can tell that he knows something’s wrong in the last couple seconds, but you never see the plane. He’s just driving until suddenly he isn’t.
kayl_breinhar@reddit
A building going 160mph hit him.
It's a miracle no one was seriously injured or killed.
This approach has always been notorious for scaring the shit out of people driving beneath it. There's an alternate future where some horrible things could've happened.
For once HellWorld mercifully didn't HellWorld.
IndependenceStock417@reddit
He didn't see what hit him either
TbonerT@reddit
He was delivering bread to a depot at the airport. I suspect he had a pretty good idea.
ThirdSunRising@reddit
Nope but for a second it looked like he could hear it coming, like he’s looking out the window wondering why it was so much louder than usual
Radioactive_Tuber57@reddit
You can hear it in the audio just before impact.
DietCherrySoda@reddit
Disappointed is such a strange thing to be in that situation
GermanCommentGamer@reddit
You can actually see the landong gear out of the driver side window right before the impact, but I agree I want to see a full view.
GreenDevil97@reddit
Yeah, not the most interesting perspective. I want to see one from outside
_litz@reddit
I dunno the airplane wheel filling the truck window is a pretty interesting perspective. The freeze frame is harrowing, to say the least.
GreenDevil97@reddit
We are yet to see any post collision images
_litz@reddit
The plane was damaged substantially enough the NTSB classified this as an "accident" and not an "incident" so those pictures should be very interesting indeed.
lewisfairchild@reddit
holy moly I hadn’t noticed that & just went back to do a freeze frame. Insane!
Avi8tor_Zeus@reddit
It’s fake
corsa180@reddit
The local news outlets here are all reporting it hit the truck:
“During the descent, the Federal Aviation Administration says a tire from the plane's landing gear struck a street light and then a tractor-trailer. That light pole then struck a Jeep, according to the New Jersey State Police.
“The driver of the truck was taken to the hospital with minor injuries, according to the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which operates the airport.”
Prestigious-Skin4391@reddit
Sure bud
Accomplished_Bet_323@reddit
What makes you say so?
apflores904@reddit
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/s/B0CySCQkN3
UandB@reddit
There might be, but a lot of security cameras operate as a series of stills instead of full motion video
Crystalline_E@reddit
Mentour: but sadly that didn't happen
mrshulgin@reddit
Yeah, this image really looks like a still from a security camera.
SnazzyStooge@reddit
Looks eerily similar to the Asiana SFO crash.
HLSparta@reddit
Or the British Airways 777 (I think) that just barely wasn't able to make the runway after losing both engines
I_AM_FERROUS_MAN@reddit
First thing that jumped into my mind. I wonder what caused the crew to lose situational awareness.
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
AutoModerator@reddit
Your comment or post has been automatically removed from /r/aviation. Posts/Comments from new accounts are automatically removed by our automated systems. We, and many other large subreddits, do this to combat spam, spambots, and other activities that are not condusive to the sub. In the meantime, participate on Reddit to build your acouunt age and this restriction will go away. Also, please familiarize yourself with this subreddit's rules, which you can find in the sidebar or by clicking this link. Do not contact the moderation team unless you feel you have received this message/action in error. We will not manually approve comments or posts from new accounts.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
JaaacckONeill@reddit
Pretty sure the 777 and 767-400 share a pilot type rating too.
CptSandbag73@reddit
You may be thinking of 757/67
Y0uMadD0g@reddit
They do not
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
Or the Delta A330 landing short of runway at AMS.
nerdtypething@reddit
good thing it was able to bunny hop off that semi’s trailer.
Ok-Delivery216@reddit
I would love to see a pic of that trailer to see if there’s skid marks on top! Just wow. But, I don’t really think a trailer would actually help a loaded plane get any bounce. Maybe a flatbed but not a box truck. Yikes.
FoximaCentauri@reddit
There’s definitely skid marks on the drivers seat.
FOSSnaught@reddit
That or the seat cover is missing
Ok-Delivery216@reddit
😂😂
alltheothersrtaken@reddit
There is a video of inside the truck. It got smashed into.
TigerIll6480@reddit
It looks like it was about a foot from rolling that semi onto that wall. How many alarms were screaming in that cockpit?!?
Conor_J_Sweeney@reddit
This was frighteningly close to being the worst aviation disaster in the US in 25 years. We’ve been flying for less than 125 years. This was a very lucky incident.
latorreverde@reddit
Truck on truck crime
thetruesupergenius@reddit
r/angryupvote
jdaude@reddit
It’s not a concrete wall, it’s a blast fence
Disastrous-Wall-6943@reddit
Behind the blast fence.
The concrete barrier at the shoulder of the road.
lamephoto@reddit
I think they mean the side of the bridge.
ahmc84@reddit
There is a concrete wall between the Turnpike and the airport property
doskkyh@reddit
Looks like a concrete wall to me.
Brilliant_Night7643@reddit
NTSB just posted on X….now being classified as an accident
FM2P4@reddit
I find it interesting that the post only mentions it striking the light pole and not the truck.
ThirdSunRising@reddit
I start to wonder what role disbelief plays in that. They could believe that it would strike a light pole and launch that into the road and it would hit a truck and so on, sure. But to believe that it hit a damn truck, stayed airborne, landed normally, and the truck driver survived, yeah they're gonna need to confirm the details before spreading that story
ThirdSunRising@reddit
Surprising that there was ever a moment where this wasn't classified as an accident. They hit a vehicle and sent a dude to the hospital, that's an injury accident by pretty much any standard I can think of
yellowishbluish@reddit
that looks low, that's low right?
ThirdSunRising@reddit
Well they didn't fly under the truck
30yearCurse@reddit
Is this the one that hit the bakery truck?
ThirdSunRising@reddit
Yep that's the one
wafflepiezz@reddit
That is way too fucking low, wtf
TheSteve1778@reddit
Almost looks like they were aiming for the numbers
trikkyt@reddit
Prior to 9/11, there was an earthen berm just outside the perimeter fence and adjacent to EWR runway 29. Located between the New Jersey Turnpike and a service road, it would have been directly underneath the pictured 767. You could pull to the side of the service road and climb the berm to sit on top of it, with planes passing directly overhead, sometimes 10’-20’ overhead. With only the occasional encounter with security, who would just tell you to leave the property, for years this was one of the best kept secrets for aviation fans to get up close to landing aircraft.
railker@reddit
Oh damn, yeah that looks like it would've been a GREAT spot to watch. Guessing they needed all the room they could get to put some EMAS in, by the looks of it, shoved that service road right up against the wall.
trikkyt@reddit
Oh cool… You found an old photo that shows the location of the berm. Nice.
railker@reddit
Google Earth history function and some Photoshop 😁 some newer better satellite shots but they weren't as old, didn't feel as authentic.
Delicious-Finger-593@reddit
I haven't seen any passenger testimony yet. Did they notice they were way too low, or did the screaming start after the landing gear clotheslined the truck?
RandomObserver13@reddit
I saw a comment on one of the videos, not sure what the source was, that a passenger stated they heard a bang and that the landing was hard, but otherwise they didn’t know what happened until well afterward.
DoctorIsMyNick@reddit
I'm willing to bet that this becomes a GTA 6 mission. We already see a plane flying over the NJ turnpike in the trailer, I wouldn't be surprised if we're required to drive a taller-than-normal truck on the highway to bring down a jet.
_____rs@reddit
Press: 'The truck did not file a flight plan"
Coliver1991@reddit
People keep talking about the plane hitting the light pole but from this image it appears that the landing gear struck the truck directly.
CardinalOfNYC@reddit
This a very blurry photo with a framing that makes the perspective incredibly hard to judge. A lot of people saying this shows the wheels toching the truck but it is entirely possible there's dozens of feet separating them.
CoffeeNoob19@reddit
Considering the landing gear plowed into the truck’s cabin, yeah, I’d say it “touched” it.
k_mermaid@reddit
there's video from inside the truck. It tipped the truck over.
DesertRunnerX@reddit
Too low for airmanship, switching to luck.
New-IncognitoWindow@reddit
But was there a NOTAM for the light pole? It could have made all the difference.
Kanyiko@reddit
The notam for the light pole is 'do not fly this low or NJ Turnpike demands you pay toll for use of its road'.
njsullyalex@reddit
“And keep right except to pass.”
planenut767@reddit
And observe the car pool rules from 6-9am and 4-7pm
Fold67@reddit
Would they ever not be car pool valid?
Spin737@reddit
Increased Light Pole Activity. MIP. LOM decommissioned.
the_silent_redditor@reddit
Page 35 of NOTAM will explain clearly this light pole; page 456 will explain clearly the delivery route of this truck.
Easily avoidable.
New-IncognitoWindow@reddit
Damn can’t believe I missed that when I made a collect call from a payphone to the briefer.
ThirdSunRising@reddit
lol we should also notify pilots about the trucks on the highway, gotta maintain clearance from them too
McCheesing@reddit
Unless the light pole was just installed, no
SubsidedRhyme11@reddit
St. Maarten looks different here /s
Suspicious-Visit8634@reddit
I used to drive by EWR every day for work and would always be amazed how low the approaches were when landing this way
LucyLilium92@reddit
Same with LGA. Some airplanes approach lower than others
well-that-was-fast@reddit
There is a lot of desire to run a train to LGA above the Grand Central Parkway but the standard response is to point out the 20' above the road surface + 10' of bridge structure + a 10' high train = in the aircraft flight path.
coffeeshopslut@reddit
I was working at the DOT yard underneath a pile driver with 100 ft mast and the planes would get eeriely close to the tip of the mast...
Coliver1991@reddit
I have a feeling that after this incident that's going to change...
majesticnoodl@reddit
We have St. Maarten’s at home
FixergirlAK@reddit
Best use of that meme ever. We have St. Maarten's at home...and it's freaking New Jersey.
bunbun8@reddit
"We don't have the beaches but we sure have the cannollis."
moon__lander@reddit
St. Jerseys
WildVelociraptor@reddit
New Marty's
fishmousse@reddit
if you compare st maarten and NJ, you should be sentenced to living the rest of your life in NJ
RocknrollClown09@reddit
I’m really surprised nobody talks about the Stadium Visual to 29 in EWR like they talk about the River Visial into DCA or SXM. I’ve done all of them and this is by far the sketchiest approach.
ThaddeusJP@reddit
Ive said it here on reddit before but I think one day a plane is gonna come in too low there and kill someone on the beach and/or crash and that will be the end of anyone out there on that part of the beach.
Crafty_Fan_6202@reddit
I landed there once and it was extremely scary how close we were to the beach. Landed like a sack of potatoes going 300mph or something.
CardboardTick@reddit
That’s more like St. Barts than St. Maarten
robkillian@reddit
That's funny
BadTraditional401@reddit
I think this can be categorized as a close call...
ThirdSunRising@reddit
From the bread truck’s perspective it’s a hit and run
SixLegNag@reddit
Can you imagine getting behind the wheel again after a whole ass 767 hits your truck and you see the wheel coming for your head? Hoping the driver gets a big fat payout from the airline for this.
ThirdSunRising@reddit
Yeah there’s gonna be some weird PTSD from this one
gauderio@reddit
Near miss. Almost missed the truck.
Old_Jelly_2085@reddit
George Carlin lives!
scotsman3288@reddit
10 feet lower and it would probably be catastrophic....
Kinder22@reddit
Headline: United Plane Strikes Light Pole on Newark Final Approach
Truck driver: Am I a joke to you?!?!
Truck: (RIP)
PendragonDaGreat@reddit
A light pole is a stationary object (or should be). A truck is (probably) not. By noting they hit the stationary object the headline is saying "plane was not where it was supposed to be" if they said the moving object they could also be saying "truck was not where it was supposed to be"
bonzothebonanza@reddit
To this this plane is just a few feet away from a deadly disaster is insane
runway31@reddit
Entirely Speculation, but maybe they were cleared for the visual and just lost SA of their descent profile?
railker@reddit
Flying the RNAV W for 29. Well at least, that's what they were cleared for.
runway31@reddit
Would they be flying as LPV or LNAV MDA? or something else? I'm curious how the flight directors were set up
railker@reddit
Chart for the approach, I only see the latter at the bottom, but the details of approaches go beyond what I know. 😁 Curious too on what exactly restricts the vertical aspect of guidance. Beyond, yknow, lookin out the window at the PAPIs and goin 'That's a lotta red'.
runway31@reddit
Interesting, only has lnav mda mins. Maybe they saw 4 red and didnt realize HOW RED that 4th light was. Had runway in sight so they can descend below the MDA, just didnt stay on the glidepath
the_claus@reddit
So, I pulled the flight track data (and we know this might be problematic at low altitudes etc etc) but comparing UAL169 with the flights that followed directly, there is a discrepancy between those altitudes
adoggman@reddit
Why are there a bunch of data points for UAL169 on the left part of this screenshot not at all lined up with the runway and seemingly at random altitudes?
cyberentomology@reddit
Looks like you have 25’ vertical resolution there.
the_claus@reddit
This was the right turn on approach
Turbulent-Quality-29@reddit
Thought they said it hit a pole and that and/or a detached wheel hit the truck but not whilst attached to the plane... That angle doesn't seem to back it up...
tconsolazio@reddit
The official story was revised last night to the wheels hitting two separate objects- the truck cab and a light pole.
Thequiet01@reddit
Looking at the photo I can actually see how even without hitting the truck the airflow may have been enough to tip it over.
invertedspheres@reddit
They would have cleared it if the 767 had landing gear that was angled up instead of down. /s
alltheothersrtaken@reddit
Why is the truck being hit not the headline?
R4G@reddit
Trucker’s fault for not having transponder on.
scolbath@reddit
Transponder? He needed TCAS!
stealthybutthole@reddit
maybe because the original tweets from the NTSB only mentioned the light pole and not the truck.
CardinalOfNYC@reddit
Because what happened is the plane's tire hit a light pole, broke off and then the tire hit the truck. The airplane did not hit the truck, well, not as a whole.
Coliver1991@reddit
You can plainly see the landing gear striking the truck here.
skinte1@reddit
It's possible the landing gear touched the top of the trailer but the driver POV showing the damage to the cab is most definitely not from the plane itself hitting it. It's from the light pole hitting the cab...
thetruesupergenius@reddit
Planely.
alltheothersrtaken@reddit
I mean still. The truck should still be the headline. Aircraft wheel strikes truck after hitting light pole seems more fitting. Rather than, hit a light pole oh and hit a moving truck too btw.
CardinalOfNYC@reddit
You asked why. I told you why.
It seems you weren't really looking for an answer, despite having asked a question.
alltheothersrtaken@reddit
Wow dude no im just having a conversation. Nothing directed towards you just find it odd it wasn't the headline that's all.
CardinalOfNYC@reddit
If this interaction went down IRL, I would not think you wre having a conversation with me. I'd think you were a jerk who asked a question with zero intent of listening to any answer.
It's remarkable, too, cuz you just plain wouldnt do this IRL. Nobody does because it is so beyond the pale. But the internet messes with people, makes them act in ways they'd never act IRL.
MyDespatcherDyKabel@reddit
Completely agreed… I think the most plausible reason is the reporter was unaware while posting that.
alltheothersrtaken@reddit
Yeah that makes most sense.
MyDespatcherDyKabel@reddit
Exactly
Lampwick@reddit
Maybe somebody thinks that a truck could be interpreted as a moving obstacle that "wasn't there initially", but a light pole is always there so it's the more damning of the two things struck?
Probably not worth trying to get into the confused mind that wrote it. The quality of journalism nowadays is highly variable.
AussieJimboLives@reddit
WHOOP WHOOP Too low, baguettes
YeltoThorpy@reddit
Has anyone got an image of a normal approach at this point to superimpose where the plane should have been at that point. I don't know the airport so don't know how far off good it is. (I assume bad but don't know how bad)
Rare-One1047@reddit
The street lights are lower than normal here, so you figure for a "normal" landing at an acceptable height + room for error, wind, etc., puts the lowest limit (including margins) around the height of a regular street lamp.
danmarce@reddit
This IS NOT just a pilot error. Building a system that allows for not error margins is the problem. We just got a final report about that. There is NO a single cause for this.
And I would not be surprised if the NTSB report ends up mentioning hundreds, if not thousands of close calls.
Rare-One1047@reddit
The fact that they have special low-profile street lights should tell you everything you need to know about the flight path.
TheAgedProfessor@reddit
I mean, how much buffer is enough? There's an intended glideslope for a reason. These pilots chose to come in lower than that. No matter where the minimum altitude sits, you could always say "man, if there was just another 10 feet of buffer, we wouldn't have hit that lightpole"... and someone will always still try to go lower.
Sasquatch-d@reddit
There isn’t a glideslope to runway 29, and VNAV doesn’t work in the same parameters as a glideslope for an ILS approach.
leonworth@reddit
There ia no glideslope to 29. Its RNAV only
railker@reddit
But there's still a 'glide path', no? Or whatever you want to call it, whatever metric to which the PAPI lights that are on runway 29 are aimed and calibrated.
Sasquatch-d@reddit
Not in the same sense that they work for ILS approaches. RNAV approaches can still offer vertical guidance but VNAV guidance doesn’t get more sensitive the closer to the runway you get like a glide slope.
potatolicious@reddit
I mean, I feel like you're both right? In the sense that there is no completely foolproof thing that 100% prevents this type of incident, but also how did they commit this specific error?
All unintentional human errors are systemic in some way. Did the aircraft notify that they were off their descent profile? If so, why was the warning ignored? If not, why not?
Cultural_Thing1712@reddit
Dang a meter lower and we could have gotten a 100+ casualty event.
eric_gm@reddit
Upvoted for using the metric system
KHDPhoto@reddit
not me trying to figure out how "100+ casualty" was metric
NoRodent@reddit
100 metric people = 64.7 US customary people.
TEG24601@reddit
By mass.
Individual_Peach533@reddit
0.1 kilopeople
mynameisnotorson@reddit
A dozen dozen + in imperial.
intortus@reddit
That's gross.
Ok_Complex8873@reddit
Two school buses of casualties.
ZBBYLW@reddit
Meanwhile in America - it's about the height of a standard door knob.
Imiga@reddit
Check out the big brain on Brad!
SlagathorTheProctor@reddit
Almost. A meter is an instrument that measures something. The unit of length is a metre.
ForeverJFL@reddit
I will second the upvote.
UW_Ebay@reddit
Do you think they felt it on the airplane?
budgefrankly@reddit
On the other post on this crash someone posted ATC audio and control and the pilots were laughing about how sketchy the landing had been.
So no, at the time they felt nothing. Probably thought it was just more turbulence
UW_Ebay@reddit
Oh wow that is crazy. Can’t imagine how they felt afterwards.
FlyByPC@reddit
Uh, Captain -- what does it mean if you get five white lights on the PAPI?
Sasquatch-d@reddit
Sorry if I’m ruining your joke but PAPIs only have 4 lights, and there’s no PAPIs for runway 29 in EWR.
FlyByPC@reddit
Yep.
TIL. Must be brake lights, then!
Chrisdkn619@reddit
Coming in hot... and low!
DatsLimerickCity@reddit
Idiot pilot wasn’t following the PAPI Lights
CharAznableLoNZ@reddit
Instrument approaches don't always line up with the PAPI lights. Either way he was low and should have known.
CharAznableLoNZ@reddit
Minimums Minimums Minimums ALTITUDE ALTITUDE ALTITUDE
StorminXX@reddit
You're a little low, Cougar
hchn27@reddit
This looks like a still image from a security cam video I desperately need to watch
hchn27@reddit
Hey so….this is actually insane ..
RB211Thrust@reddit
WELL below the glidescope!
cyberentomology@reddit
Wasn’t that the main plot premise of Die Hard 2, with the comically implausible ability to move the glideslope from a computer? 🤣
Weak_Tangerine_6316@reddit
EWR has heavies landing on a 6700' rwy, JFK, EWR, LGA and surrounding is the worlds most congested airspace pushed to and possibly past its max, visuals at SFO, DCA with all the helo routes, SFO, DCA, LGA, JFK, EWR, MDW all with complex intersecting rwy ops, old tech, understaffed, overworked controllers. No wonder shit goes wrong.
Investing money to modernize equipment and airport designs, and limiting traffic to manageable levels are completely feasible, especially for the world's richest country. This would force airlines to fly less flights with larger aircraft, but the same number of passengers could move through the sky.
ATL, ORD, LAX, DFW, DEN, MCO all move plenty of traffic without all this wacky shit because they're properly designed for the volume they have. Nobody in their right mind would design an airport for 300k+ movements a year that looked like DCA, LGA, JFK, EWR, or SFO because their layouts were never intended for that sort of volume and can't handle it safely.
AusMaverick@reddit
FOUR RED, ADD SOME BREAD... wait.
cyberentomology@reddit
Maybe it was cake?
Kathjzx@reddit
Spirit would never.
Tacomaguy24@reddit
Never will
snailmale7@reddit
Not any more
cyberentomology@reddit
Just a tad low. This pilot probably thought he was in St Maarten
Rare-Consequence-838@reddit
Bread strike!!!
Tenzipper@reddit
Take your upvote and GTFO.
Key-Monk6159@reddit
Waiting for the NTSB report to say that the truck was at the wrong altitude.
Seriously, scary situation and glad nobody was killed.
TampaPowers@reddit
Half a second and he would have eaten rubber instead :S
the_silent_redditor@reddit
Remarkable the truck driver survived.
And, really, we’re talking about mere feet where this would have been a downed 777.
Glad everyone survived, and my thoughts are with that poor driver; I look forward to the initial report but struggle to see how this isn’t pilot error.
sixmilefinal@reddit
764*
the_silent_redditor@reddit
Don’t go on an aviation sub when you’ve had a few beers after work!
Edited:)
sixmilefinal@reddit
lol
Original_Log_6002@reddit
Is this the aviation version of jumping up and smacking the top of a doorway?
oxidax@reddit
Yesterday was windy as heck would that have anything to do with this? This looks so scary
Suspicious-Bowl6249@reddit
Not really, unless it’s windshear maybe but windshear would be told to the pilots from ATC and on the metar
biggsteve81@reddit
It was a gusting headwind. A drop in windspeed could lead to a sudden drop in altitude. This close to the runway they should have gone around.
Suspicious-Bowl6249@reddit
Yeah that’s true I guess but the chances of it being a direct headwind is low and even so the pilots should’ve been watching their airspeed and altitude, the airport I land at has trees 50 feet high right next to the threshold even on windy days I never clipped them coming in to land
biggsteve81@reddit
The wind was 300 at 16 and gusting while landing runway 29.
unknownplayr7@reddit
The NTSB report is gonna be interesting
brewditt@reddit
"slightly below GS"..."Correcting"
nomadschomad@reddit
It also struck a whole dang bakery truck
donkeyrocket@reddit
Hearing "bakery truck" had me envisioning some sort of local transit van or something. The contents of a semi truck don't typically make the headline so I wasn't expecting a much larger truck.
Any-Worldliness-679@reddit
Somebody came home to Jersey with a bunch of bread that, eh, "fell off a truck..."
nomadschomad@reddit
"But it did officers. Scout's honor."
owa00@reddit
Maybe the bakery truck owed it money?
styxswimchamp@reddit
Checks out, the truck was carrying a lot of dough
planenut767@reddit
Did it get knocked off the back of the truck?
owa00@reddit
You mfer 😏
Martybc3@reddit
I’m sueing the shit out of that airline if I’m that trucker
JustPlaneNew@reddit
That's some scary stuff
ll123412341234@reddit
Buddy got tagged by an Airliners main landing gear and lived to see another day. Dude needs to buy a lotto ticket and find a great lawyer
Any-Worldliness-679@reddit
Those fucks need to be FIRED.
No, "people make mistakes" bullshit. This is gross incompetence in a field where that doesn't fly (sorry). IDGAF if the G/S was erroneous, blah blah whatever other excuses people will dream up. You get unstable, you go around, PERIOD.
JoeS830@reddit
If that's the bakery truck then the driver is not looking at the approaching plane in the video. He's looking to his right, and the plane is arriving from the left.
Deadpool2015@reddit
He was looking to the right because he was trying to get over.
JoeS830@reddit
Makes sense. I just remember in the original post people were saying "you can tell he's seeing the plane approaching, that's terrifying". I felt like it was my civic duty to point out that someone was wrong on the internet.
https://xkcd.com/386/
khj24@reddit
Insane picture
Middle-Nerve1732@reddit
It looks to be around 10ft or so from not even clearing the concrete wall. My lord that is as close a close call as I’ve ever seen. I feel like all the “struck a light pole” headlines are selling this short
CapeGreg767@reddit
Pilots fatigued from flying across the ocean, got low and slow, didn't correct and didn't go around. Pilot error.
Hypnoti_q@reddit
You can’t park there mate
aviation-ModTeam@reddit
Your post has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.
If you post in this subreddit, you are expected to engage in the discussion. Do not post images, links, or videos just to karma farm or drive engagement. Questions with simple or easily-googled answers are not permitted.
If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail. Thank you for participating in the r/aviation community.
CarminSanDiego@reddit
Yesss that’s two more wide body spot opened up for me
ekkidee@reddit
International too
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
aviation-ModTeam@reddit
Your comment has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.
This subreddit is open for civil, friendly discussion about our common interest, aviation. Excessively rude, mean, unfriendly, or hostile conduct is not permitted. Any form of racism or hate speech will not be tolerated.
If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail.
asswipesayswhat@reddit
Looks they’re trying to make that sale at ikea
getmet79@reddit
Get there before the “restaurant” closes
dvd_00@reddit
Approaching minimums....
SeaRun1497@reddit
almost looks like they are aiming for the displaced threshold for touch down
njsullyalex@reddit
I can kinda understand, 6,700 foot runway with a challenging right turn on final, windy conditions, in a big airplane, they don’t want to float
Shel_gold17@reddit
I’m not a pilot, so this is probably a stupid question. Are they allowed to tell a controller “that’s just not an option” when they get assigned a runway?
Drunkenaviator@reddit
Yes. You can refuse the short runway and take the longer one with the 30kt crosswind. You'll see some of the bigger heavies do it every time they're running 29, because 6700ft in a loaded heavy airliner is NOT a lot of runway.
njsullyalex@reddit
And Newark still gets 747 service with Lufthansa.
plhought@reddit
The 67 isn't that heavy when it gets into EWR. It's burned most it's departure weight in fuel.
29 would be much preferable than a 30ish crosswind.
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
Yes. Pilot in command has the ultimate responsibility over the safety of the aircraft. Now, depending on traffic, that means you might have to hold for a long time, or even divert, but if you don't like what the ATC tells you to do, you can use a simple word "unable".
Shel_gold17@reddit
Thanks. I was hoping that was the case, and pretty sure that was the case, but it’s always good to know for sure!
distantreplay@reddit
Just out of curiosity for those who know, if the NTSB report puts the blame on the pilot, would this be the end of a career?
MidnightSurveillance@reddit
No, likely remedial training, strong union.
Matuteg@reddit
Depends. Didn’t the guy who bent the 76 sued United and got fired?
Drunkenaviator@reddit
He did, but it came out in the suit that he was massively incompetent.
flipintheair@reddit
And on probation
Matuteg@reddit
Doesn’t surprise me lol good pilots usually have HR complaints, not bending metal lol
mduell@reddit
Has this image been authenticated?
Grintastic@reddit
Am I being more exposed to aircraft related accidents or is it happening more frequently?
Darth_Atheist@reddit
Glideslope... whooooop...buzz buzz bing bong... Glideslope!
aviation-ModTeam@reddit
Your post has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.
If you post in this subreddit, you are expected to engage in the discussion. Do not post images, links, or videos just to karma farm or drive engagement. Questions with simple or easily-googled answers are not permitted.
If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail. Thank you for participating in the r/aviation community.
Matuteg@reddit
I don’t think I’ve ever used a GS/ILS on 29. It’s either visual or NRAV with VNAV path
harveyzheng88@reddit
That is the problem here, pure visual flying on final.
InteractiveCream@reddit
Which honestly shouldn't be that much of an issue
FolderOfArms@reddit
TRAFFIC! TRAFFIC!
notadroid@reddit
"strikes light pole" meaning absolutely wrecked a truck, snagged a light pole and almost tore the gear off on a wall, sure, it struck a light pole.
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
aviation-ModTeam@reddit
This content was removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.
This subreddit is dedicated to aviation and the discussion of aviation, not politics and religion. For discussion of these subjects, please choose a more appropriate subreddit.
If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail. Thank you for participating in the r/aviation community.
Critical_Opening_394@reddit
bring back spirit
RememberTommorrow@reddit
Can’t park there mate
AdvantageMain3953@reddit
A couple feet from disaster
kfc469@reddit
It did not. The tire hit the pole and broke off. The tire then proceeded to hit the truck. The tire was not attached to the plane when it hit the truck. Small but important distinction. If the plane was low enough to hit the truck, it probably would have slammed into the wall instead of making it to the runway.
Smharman@reddit
Unfortunately times Microburst? Or just unstable approach?
-Economist-@reddit
I would like to listen in on the call between the bakery truck driver and his wife/partner.
“heh hon, you’re not going to believe this..”
RF-Guye@reddit
I wonder if the weight on wheels activated, did the spoilers pop then??
the_claus@reddit
Just curious, do we know if this was an ILS approach?
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
There's no ILS for that runway.
DrewOH816@reddit
Since you're familiar with the runway, I'll assume you know the approach information as well...
How far off the glideslope are they here? 40 - 60 -80 - 100 feet?
They were what 6-8 feet away from a total catastrophe here the result of which we could speculate here all day long but it wouldn't have been pretty to say the least.
I knew we'd see a picture like the above at some point but I wasn't expecting so CLEAR and precise; wow!
prex10@reddit
There is no glide slope for this runway. It's a circling RNAV approach.
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
I'm not familiar, but that's way too low in any case. I would be surprised if PAPI lights didn't indicate four red (i.e. significantly below the profile).
We never (intentionally, anyway) fly below the PAPI/glideslope profile, and even with 3 reds and 1 white light (meaning slightly below the profile), you should start correcting the vertical profile straight away.
Nice_Young_4188@reddit
It was the RNAV-W 29
insaneplane@reddit
That is one crazy approach! I'm surprised it's not considered a circling approach, because you turn a total of 70 degrees after the visual guidance fix.
the_claus@reddit
Is there a way to get a 3D of the approach path somewhere?
Nice_Young_4188@reddit
I think it is one of the sketchiest approaches in the NAS at least for a wide body or even a narrow body for that matter
njsullyalex@reddit
Just over a 6,000 foot runway and they land 767s/777s on there after a Kai Tak right turn
njsullyalex@reddit
RWY 29 has no ILS. RNAV or visual approach only.
FlyingRottweiler@reddit
Don’t think there’s an ILS on 29. Stadium Visual / RNAV?
Suspicious-Bowl6249@reddit
You only use ils or ifr approach down to minimums which are usually 500 feet above the runway, there wasn’t bad visibility or weather so even if that runway had ils capabilities auto land wouldn’t be on,
Anti-redtard@reddit
I was wondering if this was a case of ILS spoofing but saw the other comments...
sjaran@reddit
It's the RNAV to 29
radioactive_sharpei@reddit
Imagine being the trick driver and trying to explain to your boss you got hit by a jumbo jet. 'An airplane, Ricky, sure. We're gonna need you to come in immediately for a drug test. '
boobooaboo@reddit
I’ve done 29 many times into EWR, never had problems not hitting stuff on the ground.
AdoringCHIN@reddit
Holy shit. If that had hit the truck a fraction of a second earlier that driver might've been killed. And if that plane had just been just a few feet lower that could've been a catastrophic crash. Someone better be getting yelled at right now
freshmoves91@reddit
It hit a goddam truck
Sensei-Madara@reddit
The aircraft hit a truck, who cares about a light pole ?
mattyGOAT1996@reddit
Hit the top of a bakery truck too
snailmale7@reddit
High to Low - look out below (that is what they drilled in us, in pilot training, right before they said get the latest Altimeter setting on the ATIS before commencing your descent towards the runway )
THEN there are these PAPI lights on the side of the runway..... IF they're all red, you're dead... Red over White, you're alright .... or 2 of 4 RED....
These lessons always stuck with me.... NOT saying that they have anything to do with what transpired, but they're good lessons to remember..
pkupku@reddit
it’s chickens frying in the barnyard!
booster1000@reddit
Looks like an untimely wing gust dipped the left wing and the mains on that side got the truck. Definitely didn't butter the landing.
trendingtattler@reddit
Welcome to r/aviation - you’re likely here from r/all or r/popular.
We’re glad you’re here. This community is focused on aviation: aircraft, incidents, operations, and the people who keep it all moving.
Due to the surge in traffic, Seatbelts Fastened is now enabled and Crowd Control settings have been increased. That means:
Some comments may be filtered or require manual approval. Participation may be limited for very new or low-karma accounts.
This helps keep discussions informed, on-topic, and readable for everyone.
A few quick reminders:
Keep it aviation-focused. No politics or religion. No low-effort or inflammatory comments.
If you’re here to learn, contribute, or ask thoughtful questions - you’re in the right place.
Thanks for being here,
- The Mod Team
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Weenyhand@reddit
Stop short staffing airlines and pay people a livable wage.
Bananas_are_theworst@reddit
I’m curious to hear the conversation in the cockpit and with ATC on this. Did the pilots react at all to hitting the truck and being way too low on approach?
boulder_problems@reddit
I don't think they realised.
yt vid
Bananas_are_theworst@reddit
Wow, this is wild!! Thanks for the link.
seanconnerysbeard@reddit
Boop.
TheDornado13@reddit
Spirit died for this
Patruck9@reddit
This approach is crazy as a driver.
If you're going into Jersey City over the Newark Bay Bridge, they literally fly right at it down the river corridor directly at the bridge until the last moment they need to turn for 29.
balsadust@reddit
Wee Too Low
FrankieRoo@reddit
Whoa.
SlugsPerSecond@reddit
Two pilots thought this approach was fine. wtf
Historical_Term2454@reddit
Three. United transatlantics have 3 in the cockpit.
CactusPete@reddit
People are quite critical of this approach, but I'd just like to point out - they probably made the first turn-off!
dabarak@reddit
I hate TV news. A reporter in one of the videos mentioned a Boeing "766." Not a big deal, but when you start adding up a whole bunch of little deals...
Cardinal-guy-2023@reddit
Pilot is in trouble!
3rd-party-intervener@reddit
Pilots need to be canned. United has had too many incidents, wondering if their training standards have degraded.
Poopy_sPaSmS@reddit
What other incidents have I missed? I feel like that's one airline I feel like I don't see a lot from. Could just be missing them.
3rd-party-intervener@reddit
They nearly crashed flying out of Hawaii.
Ficsit-Incorporated@reddit
That is true, but it was also over four years ago and one incident has nothing in common with the other. You’re drawing unreasonable conclusions based on spurious data from unconnected events. No airline in the US has weaker safety standards than another; they all abide by the same laws and regulations.
unreqistered@reddit
standards set a minimum requirement …
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
You're being downvoted, but it's true.
There's a big difference in the absolute bare minimum compliance with regulation, and actually thinking as safety first, and being proactive and predictive with safety, not just reacting to accidents.
Ficsit-Incorporated@reddit
That minimum requirement is very high for commercial aviation. Enormous margins of safety are built into the standards that airlines and air crews have to follow.
I’m not saying there is no room for improvement in airline travel. There are ALWAYS ways to be better. But the standards we have now are the reason a person could (statistically speaking) fly every day for well over a century before being involved in an airline crash. Even in that event, the odds of being severely injured or killed in that crash remain vanishingly low. I’m fond of saying that a person is in orders of magnitude more danger driving to the airport than they are aboard an airline flight. I can’t decide if this incident proves my point or just makes it too on the nose to be helpful to nervous flyers. You decide.
Stfu_butthead@reddit
As a frequent traveler to Oahu and a United regular, that one bothers me
Mk5onair@reddit
They had a rough press string a few years ago. Off the top of my head the wheel falling off in Chicago and hitting cars in the employee lot and the dive in Hawaii. I think it’s a just confirmation bias, as the airline is massive with so many flights a day.
bhalter80@reddit
It was SFO not Chicago. So far they've avoided damaging humans though.
kvark27@reddit
The wheel that fell off and hit an employee car was in San Francisco.
Ruepic@reddit
If you start firing people for making mistakes you’ll end up creating a culture of people trying to hide stuff. You already see it with pilot medicals.
NYPuppers@reddit
you dont have to worry about people hiding stuff like this...
pattern_altitude@reddit
Literally the worst possible thing you could do for a culture of safety.
Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit
That's not how just culture works. As long as it wasn't intentional, or it isn't the last in a long series of safety events in that pilot's career, they'll just get some retraining.
WesternnMann@reddit
This ain’t good for my flight anxiety lol
9G_Turn@reddit
Wi too lo
ipoopcatturds@reddit
That was a stupid place to put a light pole, wasn't it?
m149@reddit
Bit too low on final combined with 22 G 38?
viperlemondemon@reddit
The bakery driver about to get a decent payday from United
GreenTeachy@reddit
I wonder if anyone on here was on this flight?
Pretty scary stuff
Prorridge@reddit
Woke up this morning
Dreamerlax@reddit
Yep, a tad a bit lower and it'll be a whole different story.
airfryerfuntime@reddit
One minute you're on the road delivering donuts, the next you're being flipped upside down by an airplane wheel.
oridinai@reddit
This is just plane crazy!
warmachlne666@reddit
Ah yes the light pole was the most notable thing it struck.
Party-Ad-6077@reddit
Ironic that the last point on this approach is ‘NOWAY’
Looking at the approach plate, I agree.
Spazrelaz@reddit
Spirit would never.
EdorasVistas@reddit
I was on a United flight that landed a few minutes before this one. Newark isn’t my normal airport but I thought the approach was low. It was very windy and we were being tossed about a bit.
njsullyalex@reddit
The one time I flew in arriving on RWY 29 was in July 2021 on a JetBlue A320 and I was using the free onboard WiFi to listen to LiveATC and listen to our flight talk to tower. We got a low altitude alert during the right turn to final.
Former_Manc@reddit
I found it a little hard to believe that a plane flew low enough to hit some light poles before crashing into the Pentagon but managed to stay in the air…but I guess it is possible after all.
peva3@reddit
TERRAIN TERRAIN, PULL UP
CompetitiveBox314@reddit
A bread strike.
NuYawker@reddit
I really want to see the footage from thisI really want to see the footage from this camera. We have seen the dash cam video. But I want to see what they damage was like on the truck.
BIG_BIRDS_MEAL@reddit
"ITS THE BAKERY TRUCKS FAULT FOR PENETRATING THE CLASS B WITHOUT CLEARANCE!!!" Said the union.😆
Emily_Postal@reddit
Is that the bakery truck being hit?
phiviator@reddit
100%
harrison2194@reddit
We have this picture but not a picture of the plane that hit the pentagon… ok
shiftyjku@reddit
A lot has changed in 25 years
GunGeekATX@reddit
The old Mueller airport in Austin had an approach right over I-35, and had some shorter light poles due to that, and some are still there. Hard to find pics, but an old one. https://www.reddit.com/r/Austin/comments/1kv24xk/austin_mueller_airport/
zaindada@reddit
I’m honestly surprised this sort of thing doesn’t happen more often.
Electrical-Risk445@reddit
I find your lack of faith disturbing.
only_glory@reddit
I really struggle to see how this would be anything else but pilot error
FistEnergy@reddit
Literally feet from a total loss. horrific.
Bitter-Researcher389@reddit
It also hit a truck. This was almost another Asiana Airlines flight 214.
jetlifeual@reddit
I 100% believe this was pilot error. I’ve watched many flights come in to RWY 29 over the years, all the way up to A350s and the margin for error seems razor thin.
I’m willing to bet even +/- 25 feet would be bad news. One would mean hitting a pole, another might force a go-around for a heavy.
Either way, maybe the pilot confused EWR with SXM?
Planestruckscars_504@reddit
I'll wait for the NTSB report, but this is really really the pilots fault. Because I never hear an accident like this happening all the time, plus that runway approach happens perfectly a lot.
pryan37bb@reddit
Planestruckscars_504@reddit
So true 🤣
MouseAvengerr71@reddit
This could've been really really bad actually
KingOfWhateverr@reddit
He hit a truck on the nearby highway…I’m not a pilot but I think you’re supposed to make it onto airport property before closing the final 10’ of altitude
InvestigatorWarm7308@reddit
Pilot thought he was in St Marteen
Any_Vacation8988@reddit
Pilot forgot he wasn’t in an erj-125 anymore. Got to get used to slinging the big meat around
LearningDumbThings@reddit
https://tsb.gc.ca/sites/default/files/rapports-reports/aviation/A07A0134/eng/A07A0134.pdf
You joke, but here’s a Global Express hull loss with two serious injuries due to this exact thing.
Dear-Regret-9476@reddit
EMB-120 or ERJ-145?
Anti-redtard@reddit
I wonder if there was ILS spoofing?
Ok_Skill_2725@reddit
Approach probably still looked fine from a 172 ;)
Bowchicawowww@reddit
Crazy
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!