Skip to content

Facebook Instagram Linkedin X-twitter Youtube

About Us
Contact Us
Advertisement

About Us
Contact Us
Advertisement

Aviation Newsletter

WhatsApp Channel

Search

News
Pilot Training
Flight School Analysis
Civil Aviation
Aviation Jobs
Training
Services
More

News
Pilot Training
Flight School Analysis
Civil Aviation
Aviation Jobs
Training
Services
More

Search

News
Pilot Training
Flight School Analysis
Civil Aviation
Aviation Jobs
Training
Services
More

News
Pilot Training
Flight School Analysis
Civil Aviation
Aviation Jobs
Training
Services
More

News

Civil Aviation

Pilot Training

Flight School Analysis

Aviation Jobs

Training

Services

About Us

Contact Us

Search

cockpit investigation

NTSB Cites Runway Safety System Failed To Alert Before Deadly LaGuardia Collision SEO DES: The NTSB said the system missed the fire truck, which lacked a transponder, amid complex runway traffic with two controllers on duty during the incident SOCIAL: A critical runway safety alert system at LaGuardia Airport failed to warn air traffic controllers before an Air Canada Express Flight 8646 collided with a Port Authority fire-rescue vehicle on March 22, killing both pilots and injuring at least 41 others. The NTSB reported the system did not detect the fire truck because it lacked a transponder, preventing a warning. The crash occurred amid complex runway traffic, and two controllers were on duty at the time, consistent with standard procedures. Investigators are reviewing air traffic control workload, emergency procedures, and cockpit communications to determine contributing factors, emphasizing that multiple causes are under examination. New York, United States: A critical runway safety alert system at LaGuardia Airport (LGA) failed to issue a warning before an Air Canada Express jet struck a Port Authority fire‑rescue vehicle on the runway late Sunday night, federal investigators confirmed Tuesday. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said the absence of an alert is a central focus of its ongoing probe into the crash that killed both pilots and injured dozens of passengers and crew. The March 22 collision involved Air Canada Express Flight 8646, a Bombardier CRJ‑900 arriving from Montréal with 76 people aboard. The aircraft was landing when it collided at high speed with an airport rescue‑and‑firefighting vehicle responding to another incident at the busy New York City airport. Two pilots were killed and at least 41 people were hurt in the impact. In a press briefing, NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy said the runway surveillance system at LGA designed to track ground movements of aircraft and vehicles“did not alert” air traffic controllers before the collision. Homendy explained that the failure stemmed from the fire truck’s lack of a transponder, a device that broadcasts its position to radar and ground detection systems. Without that signal, the alert system was unable to generate a confident track of the vehicle’s movements and therefore did not issue a warning of the imminent danger. NTSB officials noted that the crash occurred amid complex surface movements near the runway, with vehicles merging and un‑merging, which further complicated the system’s ability to create a reliable track. Even though the physical safety system was functioning, its inability to detect the non‑transponder‑equipped truck prevented an alert that might have given controllers and flight crews crucial extra seconds to respond. Homendy also confirmed there were two controllers in the LGA air traffic control tower at the time of the accident the local controller and the controller in charge which she said is consistent with standard operating procedures for the airport’s midnight shift. The NTSB is reviewing whether controller workload, shift changes, and the emergency duties being handled at the time played any role in the decision to authorize the fire truck’s runway crossing just seconds before the jet touched down. Officials are examining cockpit voice recordings and communications to better understand how the sequence unfolded. Homendy stressed that NTSB rarely finds a single cause in accidents of this scale, saying investigators are examining “many, many things” and that any conclusions are preliminary.

NTSB Cites Runway Safety System Failed To Alert Before Deadly LaGuardia Collision

Aviation Today News Desk / March 26, 2026

New York, United States: A critical runway safety alert system at LaGuardia Airport (LGA) failed to issue a warning before […]

Jeju Air Crash Probe Finds Airport Structure May Have Worsened Deadly 2024 Disaster SEO DES: Investigators say the structure failed international standards requiring frangible supports, suggesting the crash might have been survivable otherwise SOCIAL: Investigations into the December 2024 crash of Jeju Air Flight 2216 at Muan International Airport, South Korea, have linked the disaster to longstanding airport infrastructure safety failures. The Boeing 737-800 belly-landed after a suspected bird strike but overran the runway and struck a rigid concrete embankment supporting a navigation localiser antenna, causing a catastrophic fire that killed 179 of the 181 people on board. Investigators say the structure did not meet international safety standards requiring frangible supports that break on impact, suggesting the crash may have been survivable otherwise. South Korea’s government has acknowledged the safety lapse, launched an independent inquiry, and begun reviewing runway infrastructure nationwide while a final investigation report is expected in 2026. Image: Aero Time Video: TOI Muan, South Korea: Investigations into the 2024 crash of a Jeju Air passenger jet in South Korea have revealed that longstanding airport infrastructure failures likely played a critical role in turning a survivable emergency landing into the country’s deadliest aviation disaster. Jeju Air Flight 2216, a Boeing 737-800 operating from Bangkok to Muan, crashed at Muan International Airport on 29 December 2024, killing 179 of the 181 people on board. Only two cabin crew members survived the accident. Recent findings cited in a government-commissioned report suggest that the aircraft’s occupants may have survived if the plane had not collided with a rigid concrete structure located at the end of the runway. The aircraft had belly-landed during an emergency approach and slid beyond the runway before striking a concrete mound supporting a navigation localiser antenna, triggering a catastrophic fire. The concrete embankment that the aircraft struck has become a central focus of the investigation. Structural simulations conducted after the accident indicated that the impact with the runway overrun itself was survivable and that the aircraft could have come to a halt with far fewer casualties if the structure had been designed to break on impact. Experts and lawmakers have argued that the structure did not meet international aviation safety standards, which typically require runway navigation equipment to be mounted on “frangible” supports designed to collapse during an aircraft collision. South Korea’s transport authorities later acknowledged that the embankment contributed to the severity of the crash and announced plans to remove or redesign similar structures at several airports across the country. Opposition lawmakers have also blamed decades of government negligence, noting that the problematic structure had existed since the late 1990s without corrective action despite safety concerns. Investigators believe the emergency landing was triggered by a bird strike during the aircraft’s final approach. Remains of birds were found in both engines during the preliminary investigation. Evidence later indicated that the pilots may have inadvertently shut down the less-damaged engine after the bird strike, potentially reducing available thrust during the emergency landing attempt. The aircraft ultimately landed without deploying its landing gear and slid along the runway before colliding with the concrete structure at the runway’s end, leading to an explosion and fire that destroyed the aircraft. The disaster has triggered widespread criticism of the investigation process and government oversight of aviation safety. Families of the victims have accused authorities of delaying reports and failing to provide transparency about the causes of the crash. In response to mounting pressure, South Korea’s parliament approved an independent inquiry to examine the accident, including the role of bird strikes, possible mechanical failures, and the runway structure that the aircraft struck. South Korea’s Transport Ministry has also acknowledged that a navigation structure at Muan International Airport failed to meet safety standards, contributing to the deadly crash of a Jeju Air Boeing 737-800 in December 2024. Authorities admitted the structure should have been designed to break on impact, in line with international safety guidelines, and its rigid construction likely worsened the disaster. A final report from investigators is expected in 2026, as officials continue to analyze flight data, cockpit recordings and infrastructure safety standards. The tragedy remains the deadliest aviation accident in South Korean history and has prompted a nationwide review of runway safety areas and navigation equipment installations at airports across the country.

Jeju Air Crash Probe Finds Airport Structure May Have Worsened Deadly 2024 Disaster

Aviation Today News Desk / March 14, 2026

Muan, South Korea: Investigations into the 2024 crash of a Jeju Air passenger jet in South Korea have revealed that

Taipei, Taiwan: A UPS Boeing 747-8F freighter, operating as flight 5X61 from Hong Kong to Louisville via scheduled stops in Taipei and Anchorage experienced a dramatic and potentially serious incident while attempting to land at Taipei Taoyuan International Airport (TPE) amid severe weather from Typhoon Podul. The incident has triggered concern among aviation observers and gone viral on social media. The aircraft encountered intense gusty winds linked to the typhoon, leading to two aborted landing attempts. On its third approach, the No. 4 engine pod located on the outer section of the right wing struck the runway, generating a burst of sparks and visibly damaging the nacelle. According to the Aviation Safety Network, UPS flight 5X61 began its first approach to the runway around 7:20 p.m. local time. The pilots aborted the approach to runway 05L and executed a go-around, before scraping the engine during the second attempt. Finally, around 8 p.m., the aircraft touched down and completed its rollout despite the damage. Footage of the incident spread quickly online, prompting widespread attention. The visual captured not only the spark-filled impact but also the challenging weather conditions faced by the crew. With Typhoon Podul battering Taiwan, airlines had already canceled or delayed hundreds of flights, and questions are being raised over whether UPS flight 5X61 should have diverted earlier rather than attempt multiple landings in dangerous conditions. Taiwan’s Civil Aeronautics Administration is expected to launch a formal investigation, reviewing flight data and cockpit recordings to determine the sequence of decisions that led to the runway strike. Until inspections are complete, the aircraft will remain grounded in Taipei. Operational disruption was significant, 180 departures and 141 arrivals were delayed at Taipei that day.

UPS 747 Cargo Jet Damaged After Engine Pod Scrapes Runway in Taipei Typhoon Landing Try

Aviation Today News Desk / August 16, 2025

Taipei, Taiwan: A UPS Boeing 747-8F freighter, operating as flight 5X61 from Hong Kong to Louisville via scheduled stops in

Follow Us

Facebook-f Instagram Linkedin-in X-twitter Youtube

AVIATION TODAY brings the latest in aviation and aims to cater information to professionals and Aviation Enthusiasts about the Industry.

Quick Links

About Us
Contact Us
Services
Advertise
FAQ

Navigate

Latest News
Civil Aviation
Pilot Training
Flight School Analysis
Aviation Jobs
Training

General Support

info@aviationtoday.in

News Desk Support

news@aviationtoday.in

Follow Us

Facebook-f Instagram Linkedin-in X-twitter Youtube

© Copyright 2026 Aviation Today. All rights reserved.

Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Disclaimer

Search

About Us
News
Pilot Training
Civil Aviation
Flight School Analysis
Aviation Jobs
Training
Services
More
Contact Us
Advertisement

Aviation Newsletter

Facebook Instagram Linkedin X-twitter Youtube