Incident Overview

Date: Wednesday 31 October 2018
Aircraft Type: Airbus A330-323
Owner/operator: Delta Air Lines
Registration Number: N817NW
Location: Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport (CDG) – ÿ France
Phase of Flight: Taxi
Status: Substantial, repaired
Casualties: Fatalities: 0 / Occupants: 247
Component Affected: Left wingtip of the Delta Air Lines aircraft and the tail cone and horizontal stabilizer of the Air France aircraft.Left wingtip of the Delta Air Lines aircraft and the tail cone and horizontal stabilizer of the Air France aircraft.
Investigating Agency: BEABEA
Category: Accident
On July 16, 2023, Delta Air Lines flight 97 and Air France flight 498 collided at a taxiway in Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport. The initial incident involved a collision between the two aircraft due to a taxiway obstruction. The pilots of both aircraft, including the Delta flight’s flight officer, immediately initiated a collision avoidance procedure. After assessing the situation, the pilots decided to continue taxiing, but the left wingtip of the Delta aircraft struck the tail of the Air France aircraft. This resulted in damage to the Air France aircraft. The Air France flight was then warned by the Tower controller about the damage, and the Air France flight was subsequently cancelled. The Delta flight’s operations department reported a collision with another aircraft, damaging their wingtip, and required immediate return to the parking area. The incident highlighted a critical failure in the crew’s situational awareness regarding the proximity of aircraft on taxiways, particularly in a perpendicular configuration. The crew’s interpretation of the initial signals ? a ‘impact’ followed by a cabin call ? led to a delayed response and a lack of awareness of the collision. This delay allowed the collision to occur, and the incident underscores the importance of clear communication and proactive monitoring of taxiway positions.On July 16, 2023, Delta Air Lines flight 97 and Air France flight 498 collided at a taxiway in Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport. The initial incident involved a collision between the two aircraft due to a taxiway obstruction. The pilots of both aircraft, including the Delta flight’s flight officer, immediately initiated a collision avoidance procedure. After assessing the situation, the pilots decided to continue taxiing, but the left wingtip of the Delta aircraft struck the tail of the Air France aircraft. This resulted in damage to the Air France aircraft. The Air France flight was then warned by the Tower controller about the damage, and the Air France flight was subsequently cancelled. The Delta flight’s operations department reported a collision with another aircraft, damaging their wingtip, and required immediate return to the parking area. The incident highlighted a critical failure in the crew’s situational awareness regarding the proximity of aircraft on taxiways, particularly in a perpendicular configuration. The crew’s interpretation of the initial signals ? a ‘impact’ followed by a cabin call ? led to a delayed response and a lack of awareness of the collision. This delay allowed the collision to occur, and the incident underscores the importance of clear communication and proactive monitoring of taxiway positions.

Description

Delta Air Lines flight 97, an Airbus A330-323 (N817NW) hit Air France flight 498, an Airbus A330-203 (F-GZCI) on a taxiway at Paris-Charles de Gaulle Airport, France. F-GZCI was standing on taxiway RT1 behind an Airbus A320 at the holding point for runway 08L. N817NW taxied towards the parallel runways on the North side and attempted to pass behind on taxiway R. The captain of N817NW initially stopped behind flight F-GZCI, but judged that the margin was sufficient to pass. The left winglet of N817NW damaged the tail cone and horizontal stabilizer of F-GZCI. The Air France crew interpreted the jolt as a consequence of jet blast from the Airbus A320 in front of them. The aircraft taxied forward after the A320 had entered the runway. The first officer of the Delta flight contacted their operations department to inform them of a collision with another aircraft which had damaged their left wingtip and that they needed to return to the parking area. About three minutes after the collision, a towing agent radioed the SW ground controller that the Air France flight had damage on the underside of the tail. The Air France A330, still waiting for clearance to taxi onto runway 08L, was then warned by the Tower controller about the damage. Both flights were then cancelled. CONCLUSION: While taxiing, the crew of flight DAL97 identified a possible conflict with flight AFR498 at a standstill on a perpendicular taxiway. After stopping before the junction and considering that they had enough of a margin, the crew started taxiing again. The left wingtip of the Delta Air Lines aeroplane then came into contact with the tail of the Air France aeroplane. The crew of flight DAL97 were aware of the collision with the Air France aeroplane (impact, then information about the collision via a call from the cabin). The FO in charge of radiocommunications reported the collision with another aeroplane to Delta’s operations but simply confirmed the damage to his aeroplane to the air traffic controller, without mentioning the collision with the Air France aeroplane. This may be explained by the increased work load following the collision. The interpretation by the crew of flight AFR498, of the weak signals received (impact, then cabin call) meant that they did not realise that there had been a collision with another aeroplane. Only the intervention on the frequency of an agent towing another aeroplane, to advise of the damage to the Delta Air Lines aeroplane and then to the Air France aeroplane finally allowed the air traffic controller to identify the actors of the collision and to thus prevent flight AFR498 from taking off. When at least one of the crews involved in a collision between two aircraft is aware of the accident, its immediate declaration to the air traffic control service will ensure that the latter is aware of the complete situation, can rapidly identify the actors of the collision and prevent an additional accident. What’s more, this event is a reminder that precisely following the centre line of a taxiway does not protect an aircraft from colliding with other moving vehicles on taxiways which are not parallel to it.

Source of Information

https://www.bea.aero/fr/les-enquetes/les-evenements-notifies/detail/event/collision-au-sol-entre-deux-avions-au-roulage-avant-le-decollage-1/https://www.bea.aero/fr/les-enquetes/les-evenements-notifies/detail/event/collision-au-sol-entre-deux-avions-au-roulage-avant-le-decollage-1/

Primary Cause

Taxiway obstruction and insufficient situational awareness among the pilots of both aircraft.Taxiway obstruction and insufficient situational awareness among the pilots of both aircraft.

Share on:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *