http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/5396703.html
Two Northwest Airlines jets wedged together after colliding near a gate at the Twin Cities airport Tuesday night were separated early this morning and await inspection by National Transportation Safety Board investigators.
A Northwest DC-9 crashed into a larger Northwest Airbus, tearing the roof off the DC-9’s cockpit, injuring at least eight people and sending passengers scrambling for safety.
The roof of the DC-9 cockpit was peeled back 6 to 8 feet where it slid under the right wing of the Airbus 319. The center of the DC-9’s fuselage ended up under the tail section of the Airbus.
The planes were separated at about 1:30 a.m. and taken to hangers for inspection by National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigators and eventually for repairs, Pat Hogan, spokesman for the Metropolitan Airports Commission said this morning.
Six DC-9 crew members, including the pilot, were injured. Two ground employees at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport also were injured. Reports this morning said that two passengers were injured — one passenger complained of shortness of breath and was treated and released.
The injured were taken to Fairview Hospital and the Hennepin County Medical Center.
None of the injuries appeared life-threatening, said Northwest spokesman Thomas Becher.
Passengers were quickly evacuated from both planes, Hogan said today. The DC-9 passengers used emergency stairs at the rear of the plane and the Airbus passengers got out via an inflated slide, he said.
DC-9 passenger Toray Henry from Columbus, Ohio, said everything seemed normal after landing.
“Once we got close to the terminal, everyone was just kind of waiting to pop the belt and start getting off the plane, but we weren’t that close,” Henry told KSTP-TV. “It seemed like it kind of surged into the other plane. We knew that it hit another plane, and that’s why I think most of us were concerned about an explosion.”
The DC-9 had reported hydraulics problems while it was still in the air.
“I know the plane was having some hydraulic issues before it landed,” Hogan said. “And it was able to land fine despite that. But the hydraulics could have issues with both steering and brakes.”
FAA spokesman Tony Molinero said, “The pilot is saying the brakes failed.”
There was no smoke or fire, but Hogan said that fuel did spill from one of the planes. Firefighters pumped fuel from both planes into tanker trucks, he said.
Ambulance, fire, police, Transportation Security Administration personnel and the FBI respond to such incidents, Hogan said. “It’s the full contingent of investigators to both respond to any needs passengers might have and to look at the incident itself,” he said.
The DC-9, Flight 1495 with 94 passengers and five crew members, arrived from Columbus, Ohio, about 7:45 p.m. It had landed safely and was taxiing toward the gate when it ran into the Airbus, which was backing up for a flight to San Antonio. The Airbus, Flight 1849, had 38 passengers and a crew of five.
Northwest said passengers heading to San Antonio were put on a later flight.
Northwest said the DC-9’s first officer and captain were injured, apparently when the cockpit was damaged. One report said they suffered face abrasions.
NTSB investigators were expected to arrive at the airport by this morning, according to Hogan. No flights were delayed because of the collision, he said.
By: Nasir - 12th May 2005 at 18:23
What a bump for the pax in the Airbus!! Whoops-a-daisey… 🙂 A lesson that you should fasten your seat belt even on the ground.
By: Bmused55 - 12th May 2005 at 14:16
From photos I’ve seen, the DC-9’s fuselage was penetrated immediately above the cockpit windows, as well as damaged and penetrated for about 4m where it rode under the 319 tail. This probably also damaged frames/stringers, and most definitely ruptured the pressure vessel.
NW was looking to dispose of about 20 DC-9s this year, so this could very well be a candidate. Ultimately though the decision is up to the lessors and insurance companies.
interesting.
NWA own their DC-9s. No lessors to get in the way. If NWA want to scrap this one… they will.
By: Spacepope - 12th May 2005 at 14:10
From photos I’ve seen, the DC-9’s fuselage was penetrated immediately above the cockpit windows, as well as damaged and penetrated for about 4m where it rode under the 319 tail. This probably also damaged frames/stringers, and most definitely ruptured the pressure vessel.
NW was looking to dispose of about 20 DC-9s this year, so this could very well be a candidate. Ultimately though the decision is up to the lessors and insurance companies.
By: andrewm - 12th May 2005 at 11:32
Given the angles and the fact the DC9 nose wheel is extended fully the A319 must be sitting on the fuse of the DC9 not its rear gear? The DC9 couldnt be that low to go underneat the A319 tale!!
Did the wing tear into the overhead panel area as it looks like? Can you still get DC9 overhead if needed?
By: skycruiser - 12th May 2005 at 10:27
man, that’s funny.
By: Bmused55 - 12th May 2005 at 10:19
You would think with the amount of damage done, to repair such an old airframe just wouldn’t be prudent
Not necessarilly
If its not structural damage and just skin damage it is relatively easy. Even at its age it may still be viable.
It has one or two things going for it. First, its wholey owned and secondly it seems NWA want to keep their DC-9s around for a while.
Although right now… I think this ones had it.
By: steve rowell - 12th May 2005 at 05:14
The DC-9 (just a baby, 1976 vintage) is almost certainly a write-off.
You would think with the amount of damage done, to repair such an old airframe just wouldn’t be prudent
By: MerlinXX - 12th May 2005 at 04:46
Very lucky escape from what could have been potentially a lot worse. Whilst on the subject, this is taken from Thai-air’s website:
http://www.thaiair.com/About_Thai/Newsroom/Press_Release/Press_Year_2005/press0405-wu127.htm
Thai Airways International Public Company Limited’s Corporate Communications Department provided clarification on an incident involving THAI’s Airbus 330-300 aircraft, flight TG602, on the route Bangkok – Hong Kong at 19.50 hours on 19 April 2005. Prior aircraft takeoff at Bangkok International Airport, the pilot-in-command realized that there was irregularity regarding the right wing and therefore had a technician conduct an investigation. It was concluded that the wingtip of the right wing had fallen off, whereby at the same time the company’s operations center reported that an aircraft part was found on the wing of Singapore Airlines’ aircraft flight SQ 068 that was parked at Parking Bay 52 whereby the aileron on the left wing had been torn at a certain length.
After irregularity was discovered, the pilot-in-command requested a change of aircraft. During that time, 183 passengers were in transit at the international terminal, with flight departure from Bangkok at 23.15 hours and arrival in Hong Kong at 03.52 hours (local time). It was concluded that there may have been 2 causes of the incident, as follows:
Whether or not Singapore Airlines’ aircraft was parked in the right position
Whether or not THAI’s aircraft reversed in the right route
Currently, THAI has set up a committee to investigate for clarification on the causes of the incident, which will be advised further in the near future.
If the pilot did not notice this, does anyone think this could have been a lot worse too?
By: Spacepope - 12th May 2005 at 01:45
It could be “oil dry” kitty-litter type absorbent clay.
The DC-9 (just a baby, 1976 vintage) is almost certainly a write-off.
The 319 however seems to have some pretty extensive wing damage. It’ll definitely be out of service for a long time. And if the wing spar and rear pressure bulkhead are damaged… it may not fare so well either.
By: andrewm - 12th May 2005 at 01:15
I’m guessing by the amount of sand(*) on the ground that the fuel tank on the A319 was ruptured. The pilots must have been swimming in Jet A. Ugh.
*I’m sure it’s not sand but some sort of absorbant material but I didn’t know what else to call it.
Looks like sand to me! Wouldnt be surprised as they use sand for road oil spills after car accidents in the UK or at petrol stations to stop it being a fire risk.
By: Bmused55 - 11th May 2005 at 21:30
Only you could have made that comment, Sandy….. :rolleyes:
It’s true nonetheless ;).
Told to me via a Captain Ball of NWA
By: Grey Area - 11th May 2005 at 21:19
Only you could have made that comment, Sandy….. :rolleyes:
By: Bmused55 - 11th May 2005 at 21:15
I knew some NWA mad dog pilots hated the buses, but thats ridiculous 🙂
Seriously now…. glad no one was killed!
By: Whiskey Delta - 11th May 2005 at 20:33
I’m guessing by the amount of sand(*) on the ground that the fuel tank on the A319 was ruptured. The pilots must have been swimming in Jet A. Ugh.
*I’m sure it’s not sand but some sort of absorbant material but I didn’t know what else to call it.
By: Airline owner - 11th May 2005 at 20:33
reminds me of the Aer Lingus event a few months back.
By: Humberside - 11th May 2005 at 19:57
Looks nasty
By: greekdude1 - 11th May 2005 at 17:02
Another DC-9 gone. How the hell did a DC-9 cormorant the ar$e of a A319?
Because the DC9 is a lowrider.
By: DME - 11th May 2005 at 16:34
Another DC-9 gone. How the hell did a DC-9 cormorant the ar$e of a A319?
DME
By: KabirT - 11th May 2005 at 16:22
indeed..seeing they mentioned it was having problems just before landing. Lucky escape i would say. 🙂
By: Whitefox - 11th May 2005 at 16:16
Could have been alot worse!!
Sign In
May 11, 2005 at 4:01 pm