ANA plane overruns runway in Yamagata

National Dec. 09, 2012 - 04:15PM JST ( 17 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Order by Time Order by Popularity

17 Comments

3

smithinjapanDec. 09, 2012 - 04:02PM JST

Sheesh, glad there was no accident and only an incident.
2

motoyanDec. 09, 2012 - 05:15PM JST

Nobody was hurt, game on.
1

basroilDec. 09, 2012 - 06:22PM JST

Second major ANA problem in 6 months, and if they include 787 problems, more. Looks like they need to improve checks and oversight. Especially true of the now 45 year+ old design of the 737, which is the world's most crashed airplane (yes, also most flown)
2

YuriOtaniDec. 10, 2012 - 02:42AM JST

basroil it has to do with total hours divided by total accidents. This one is very minor and no one was hurt and the plane will fly again. While this has the destination 737 it does not have much in common with the 100 model.
1

GyGeneDec. 10, 2012 - 03:48AM JST

Whew, glad everyone was okay! I have a friend who is an ANA pilot... hope ANA gets its planes in good order, if it was a mechanical problem.
1

T-MackDec. 10, 2012 - 05:34AM JST

I hope this to be pilot error, and not mechanical issue's...however, all area's need to be investigated. Glad there were no injuries.
0

darknutsDec. 10, 2012 - 09:21AM JST

This one is very minor and no one was hurt and the plane will fly again.

It better not fly again until they figure out the cause of the accident.
-1

basroilDec. 10, 2012 - 10:26AM JST

YuriOtaniDec. 10, 2012 - 02:42AM JST

it has to do with total hours divided by total accidents.

More of hull losses per hull. The biggest counter for accidents is normally the number of takeoff-landing cycles, since those produce the most stress. Time in the air is also important, but you'll see that most accidents happen on takeoff or landing.

While this has the destination 737 it does not have much in common with the 100 model.

Yes, but between the dozen or so 737NG models, over 520 people have died from accidents of an 737-800 and just two for all the other versions. All 8 hull losses are of 737-800. While they do have about 50% more 737-800 than the other NG models combined, kind of odd that the 800 series has that many failures before the 700 series (which has 50% of the deliveries and have been operated longer). You are statistically safer on a 737-700ER like the ones ANA flies than the 737-800.

That said, it is about 10x safer than the 737 (all versions) average, but that still means you have a significant chance to ride an airplane that will eventually crash (not necessarily that it will crash with you on it).
1

USNinJapan2Dec. 10, 2012 - 11:37AM JST

Elderly driver? Must have hit the gas instead of the brakes? : )
-1

nandakandamandaDec. 10, 2012 - 11:53AM JST

A bit gusty yesterday.
-3

Outta hereDec. 10, 2012 - 12:03PM JST

Funny just the other day how some people where saying what a great airline ANA is. Now this on top of the recent issue of the ANA 767 bending the fuselage after a hard landing. Not a really good airline after all hey??
2

biculturalDec. 10, 2012 - 12:38PM JST

Funny just the other day how some people where saying what a great airline ANA is.

I think you are confused. No one would ever say that on JT. However, just the other day you had this to say about ANA :

ANA is an over rated, poor airline at the best of times.

Thanks for that gem.
0

Outta hereDec. 10, 2012 - 02:15PM JST

bicultural

"Funny just the other day how some people where saying what a great airline ANA is."

I think you are confused. No one would ever say that on JT. However, just the other day you had this to say about ANA :

"ANA is an over rated, poor airline at the best of times."

Thanks for that gem.

Well gee bicultural if you read that post then you would have seen the very next post after mine saying just how good the poster thought ANA was in fact he used the term excellent, as did the poster after that. So l guess you need to retract your incorrect statement hey!

And my comment that ANA is overrated, and poor at the best of times seems fairly vindicated in the face of these incidents wouldn't you say? Over running a runway, bending a plane fuselage. Hmmm l wouldn't be flying them anytime soon
1

theResidentDec. 10, 2012 - 05:40PM JST

No-one injured and no damage to the plane. I'll stick by my comment on an earlier thread and say that they are an excellent airline and I will have no problems flying them twice as per my reservations (long haul) over the next month.
0

JeffLeeDec. 10, 2012 - 07:23PM JST

ANA's service and routes are great. But they have squirrely incidents from time to time, like flying upside down....and the pilots not even noticing!

In years past, a pilot fell asleep the controls... twice... right in front of a transport ministry official who had to wake him up(!), Turns out he had sleep apnea. Hello?

They were also served a ministry warning a while back for being in the habit of taking off when gauges indicated possible problems. So I'm always a bit edgy when flying with them. The excellent and frequent booze service sure help me out, though.
1

FadamorDec. 11, 2012 - 12:05AM JST

ANA's service and routes are great. But they have squirrely incidents from time to time, like flying upside down....and the pilots not even noticing!

It wasn't a full 180° roll. In defense of the flight crew, the captain was not in the cockpit and the co-pilot was turned to try opening the cockpit door. That incident happened at night and I defy you to notice the same thing if the plane is holding you at 1G while it rolls. When they did notice, the plane was past 90° of roll and nose-down. That's probably about the time the plane couldn't keep pulling 1G.
-1

JeffLeeDec. 11, 2012 - 07:21AM JST

@Fadamoor Indeed, it was just beyond 130 degrees, which was short of actually being fully lined up. But rotate your hand to 130 degrees and your hand is turned over. For the plane, the roof was facing the ground, the belly facing up to the sky. I saw the JSTB video simulation.

The incident was caused by the co-pilot pressing the wrong button: a clear case of human error.