Gov't panel proposes air traffic control measures to boost safety after Haneda collision

The accident was apparently due to pilot error

The investigation into the collision has focused on what caused the coast guard flight crew to believe they had a go-ahead for takeoff. A partial release of the air traffic control transcript has shown no clear takeoff approval was given to the coast guard plane.

but the panel recommends hiring more air traffic control staff...

The panel recommended hiring more air traffic control staff at the country’s major airports, and introducing supplementary alert systems on the runway and in the traffic control room.

It sounds like they need to take a closer look at who is flying the planes

Does this mean they both have to be competent at speaking English?

It doesn't take a panel to recommend common-sense measures like that. Except that it's irrelevant in this case as the cause was pilot error. The captain of the Coast Guard plane didn't obey ATC instructions.

Or just train their workers better? Or maybe have competent workers to begin with?

It was a pilot error, not a control tower one.

BigPToday  07:32 am JST

Does this mean they both have to be competent at speaking English?

Yes. By ICAO law, all tower personnel and Pilots flying internationally (regardless of the fact that THIS flight was domestic) must be able to communicate in English using standard phraseology.

And while the biggest issue was pilot error, like every major aviation accident, it was not the only cause.

There were issues with tower staffing. There were issues with the color of the A350 HUD. There are, in my opinion , issues with the decision of the JAL crew not seeing an aircraft on the runway under VFR CAVOK conditions.

So I don’t think that adjustments to tower procedures is a bad idea. Anything that further reduces the possibility of a recurrence is worthy of risk management consideration.

The Dash pilot was never instructed to 'line up and wait', he was not instructed to enter the runway. Focusing about 'number 1' is pointless. A pilot needs permission to enter the runway and that is an obvious instruction in Aviation and one which the Dash pilot did not recieve.

, issues with the decision of the JAL crew not seeing an aircraft on the runway under VFR CAVOK conditions

Clouds and visibility OK doesn't mean the pilos are able to see a small aircraft at night when not pointed directly at them. Especially on a runway (so a very dark area). Most probably they actually saw some lights but thought it's normal ground illumination, not an actual aircraft.

ycgdude

It doesn't take a panel to recommend common-sense measures like that. Except that it's irrelevant in this case as the cause was pilot error. The captain of the Coast Guard plane didn't obey ATC instructions.

Not irrelevant at all, as those electronic warning measures would have made it clear to the CG pilot that it was not safe to proceed onto the runway, despite the confusion over verbal instructions.

So if more aircraft controllers are needed it wasn’t solely pilot error. Air traffic had a part in it?

The interesting thing for me is that the 5 crew members that were killed on the coast guard plane never get identified or anything shown about them on the media. No memorials, no reports, no posthumous awards, no go fund me accounts...nothing. I respect the families privacy in this matter but Japan never seems to want to recognize or even acknowledge these people and others who die in similar accidents or tragedies.

It was a pilot error, not a control tower one.

Combination

, issues with the decision of the JAL crew not seeing an aircraft on the runway under VFR CAVOK conditions

Clouds and visibility OK doesn't mean the pilos are able to see a small aircraft at night when not pointed directly at them. Especially on a runway (so a very dark area). Most probably they actually saw some lights but thought it's normal ground illumination, not an actual aircraft.

The Dash 8 was not lined up in the normal Takeoff position due to its better performance that’s true.

But it did have its lights on and the runway wasn’t dark.

There is some thought that the HUD lights on the A350 Blended with the lights on the Dash 8 making it harder to see.

And yes, the Dash 8 CG pilot blew through the ATC instructions as mentioned by GenHXZ.

But it’s inaccurate to say that this was a single point of failure. Aviation accidents almost never are.

Good news.

The fact is, the ATC was using INCORRECT Aviation Terminology {in English} (from what I have HEARD, or what was supposedly released to the public) for Clearing or Holding the Coast Guard Aircraft on the runway.

“You are CLEAR” is what should be said, to do anything..OR, if not, your instruction should be “Hold at xxx”.

This is NOT what was said by the ATC and exactly WHAT the Transcript says has NEVER been released….but you BLAME the pilot.

There’s more than ONE human involved here.

ATC said neither “Hold short” nor “Line up and wait”. This is my understanding.

While it’s true that ATC could have been more specific, my understanding is that when a pilot is cleared to an intersection, they are not cleared farther without a subsequent instruction.

So this is primarily pilot error, but there could be contributing factors as well.

The crash investigators will do a fault analysis and get to the root cause of the crash. It’ll highlight the mistakes made from engineering, process and procedure, supervision, stress and those people participating in the incident on the day. There’s always a list of issues that combine to create accidents. It’s almost never one mistake in isolation.

Theres no harm in identifying shortfalls and taking steps to rectify them early on. As long as they don’t interfere with the investigation.