Super jumbo Airbus 'creams' regional jet on JFK tarmac

I watched another video last night (different angle). That must have been quite a ride for folks on the commuter!

 

I hope they had the gyros caged.

Tom

 

Interesting attempt at exoneration: "sea of lights" making it "hard" to see the ground traffic. By that logic no one should drive at night on the roadways crowded by a whirling "sea of lights". The 380 drivers weren't paying attention and do not share their 100% negligence burden with anyone, not the controllers, not the Comair drivers, no one. Not that they won't try to protect their tickets by trying to shed some of the blame - and who knows, perhaps they'll get a judgement in their favor against "god" for putting the sun on the other side of the earth at the time and making it hard to see.

 

I think it's only in the news because it was a French airline with an Airbus product.

It's the same forces at work who tried to discredit Toyota a year ago. lol

I blame the 737 for being in the way.

 

Yep, those RLG photons were trapped.

 

You can be 100% absolutely positively certain that the jumbo pilot is now looking for work in some other line of business ... and thank goodness.

 

More likely because it was the largest airliner in the world. Leading up to the deployment of this aircraft, there was a fair amount of media attention about whether it would fit in existing airports.

Tom

 

The 'wink' meant I was joking!

 

So a French product strikes a product of Quebec (Bombardier CRJ700), so it must be Boeing's fault?

 

Airbus left seat is responsible period. Right seat was responsible to question his decision to proceed. There were walkers out there the Captian could have requested if unsure of clearance. I want to hear the CVR and know his ground speed.

 

I blame Quebec

Yes, I am JOKING

But the irony is fairly obvious

 

I notice the Airbus was moving at quite a clip.

 

I heard JFK's taxiways are 25' shorter than regulation (75' no 100')... guess they got an exception when building.

 

Shorter or narrower? I can't see where shorter would be an issue.

Tom

 

^ correct, narrower not shorter. lol

 

Much like the old joke about an ethnic (insert favorite group here) airline crew landing: "Wow, that runway is really short!", to which the copilot replies: "Yes, but look how wide it is."

Tom