· 151 comments · Save ·
General Mar 23, 2026 at 4:37 AM

Air Canada Express plane hits ground vehicle at New York's La Guardia airport, FlightRadar24 says

Posted by uhncollectable

https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/air-canada-express-plane-hits-ground-vehicle-new-yorks-la-guardia-airport-2026-03-23/
🚩 Report this post

151 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
Admiral_Cloudberg Mar 23, 2026 +1670
The headline suggests this was an ordinary low speed paint swap. It was not. The Air Canada CRJ seems to have hit the fire truck at over 100 knots, the whole front end of the plane was ripped off, unconfirmed reports of at least 2 fatalities EDIT: NBC has confirmed that the captain and first officer were unfortunately killed.
1670
uhncollectable Mar 23, 2026 +648
This headline is likely a placeholder until Reuters can attain verified information. You’re right, this headline does not represent the situation realistically. The entire cockpit is crushed.
648
hutch_man0 Mar 23, 2026 +315
It's actually impressive the way Reuters operates compared with other outlets where speed often trumps accuracy. Reuters won't state anything until they can verify it...even though the pics in r/aviation seem pretty real to us.
315
quickstatcheck Mar 23, 2026 +133
This is one of the rare times where it would be journalistically justifiable to use the words “slams” or “destroys” in a headline and they passed on it.
133
loopsbruder Mar 23, 2026 +78
Those words are so overused, I instantly d******* any article I see using them in the headline.
78
ProfitHarvest Mar 23, 2026 +2
If only the air traffic controllers were paid money...
2
Bruins8763 Mar 23, 2026 +4
I’m guessing they played it safe because of the chance of fatalities being possible in situations like these.
4
Funk-E-Beatz Mar 23, 2026 +1
I guess it saves some headline space to use "slam" to mean "criticize" and "destroy" to mean "win against an opponent" but the downside is that they can't really be used quite as literally anymore.
1
witchofpain Mar 23, 2026 +3
I saw Newsroom. You have to have two sources to confirm before reporting.
3
murfburffle Mar 23, 2026 +1
That's not what I heard. Can someone else verify they saw Newsroom?
1
byproxxy Mar 23, 2026 +178
Based on the pictures, it’s likely the pilots. How awful.
178
RavensQueen502 Mar 23, 2026 +37
And probably the truck crew.
37
Evocatorum Mar 23, 2026 +65
The truck crew (4) are at the hospital for critical injuries while there are 2 reported fatalities at the scene.
65
darshfloxington Mar 23, 2026 +16
Those ARFF trucks are freaking tanks
16
throwaway5882300 Mar 23, 2026 +15
It was an oshkosh 1500. Thing weighs 60,000 pounds and the impact rolled it.
15
qtx Mar 23, 2026 +18
Truck has crumple zones, airplane does not. Truck is the safer bet to be in.
18
phluidity Mar 23, 2026 +4
Those airport fire trucks really don't. They are giant tanks of water/foam with a huge diesel generator to power high pressure pumps and just enough truck around it to move the whole thing around. They are designed the idea that they will only ever be deployed in airfields, and any foreseeable collision will be at less then 5 mph.
4
Fullertons Mar 23, 2026 +1
I highly doubt a fire truck is designed with crumple zones in mind
1
aps23 Mar 23, 2026 +62
For us common folk, 100 knots is just over 115mph or 185kph.
62
masklinn Mar 23, 2026 +25
Lest anyone think this was a normal “city” firetruck, it wasn’t, some have identified it as an Oshkosh 1500 “striker” Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting Vehicle, these start at 62000 lbs (28 tonnes) GVWR in 4x4. And the impact was violent enough that it rolled the truck on the side and shoved it to the side of the runway.
25
NUMBerONEisFIRST Mar 23, 2026 +17
Last I heard there were two deaths and four firefighters in critical condition.
17
Rocinante24 Mar 23, 2026 +12
The article says they hit at 35km/h. Something doesn't add up.
12
Admiral_Cloudberg Mar 23, 2026 +54
Article is wrong. 35 km/h was the speed recorded at taxiway Echo, the truck was crossing at Delta. A 35 km/h collision is unlikely to cause the severity of damage visible in the photos
54
Rocinante24 Mar 23, 2026 +18
I don't know the jargon. Are you saying the recorded speed was at a spot further down the runway, after the collision?
18
Admiral_Cloudberg Mar 23, 2026 +30
Yes, precisely
30
plan_that Mar 23, 2026 +4
News over here said 35 miles/h which is significantly higher and possibly aligned with the damage
4
ExpiredExasperation Mar 23, 2026 +5
The article seems to be lacking information in general. The entire cockpit is utterly destroyed.
5
ScottOld Mar 23, 2026 +2
That's what I thought, then saw a picture
2
billdb Mar 23, 2026 +7
>The headline suggests this was an ordinary low speed paint swap. No it doesn't. It just says the plane hit a vehicle, it doesn't say anything beyond that. If anything, the fact that it is reported in national news and is getting a ton of comments and upvotes should be a clear sign this was a significant event.
7
Admiral_Cloudberg Mar 23, 2026 +9
I mean that "plane hits vehicle" headlines are common and usually it's a taxiing fender bender. When this article was posted the article contained no information about what had actually happened. Obviously my comment is long since redundant
9
Esfahen Mar 23, 2026 +7
I thought the collision happened at \~20 knots?
7
Admiral_Cloudberg Mar 23, 2026 +82
The truck was cleared to cross runway 4 at Delta, FR24 data from the flight shows the plane's ground speed as 114 knots at Delta.
82
KFCTeemo Mar 23, 2026 +7
What does delta pertain here?
7
Admiral_Cloudberg Mar 23, 2026 +40
Delta is the name of the taxiway.
40
Bullet_Train_To_Iowa Mar 23, 2026 +17
Airports and airlines use the nato phonetic alphabet for the terminals and runways. Delta meaning D
17
furie1335 Mar 23, 2026 +1
D as in Delta.
1
glhughes Mar 23, 2026 +35
There is no way; it was going very fast. If you have seen the photos it shows a catastrophic impact with the whole front of the plane missing. Terrible.
35
sean_themighty Mar 23, 2026 +6
That was the last transponder reading, but that certainly isn’t the collision speed — which could have been anything from 80-120kt with what we can guess so far.
6
Mwahaha_790 Mar 23, 2026 +2
100 knots
2
repair-it Mar 23, 2026 +1
BBC reports it as an accident at 24mph, yet the front of the airplane is ripped off and is underneath the fuselage. Looks like a lot more than 24mph to me. Fatalities appear to be just the pilots. My thoughts are with anyone affected.
1
SerentityM3ow Mar 23, 2026 +1
It looks like the front of the plane was gone. RIP to the pilots. This is really sad
1
Spirited_Rice_1157 Mar 23, 2026 +1
101 knots to be exact
1
[deleted] Mar 23, 2026 -21
[deleted]
-21
Jaquiny Mar 23, 2026 +5
Knot is a freedom units lmao
5
cinnasota Mar 23, 2026 +222
unfortunately 2 dead, more injured.
222
SpencerAXbot Mar 23, 2026 +204
Saw the damage on r/aviation it f****** looks awful
204
False-Ad1432 Mar 23, 2026 +11
Does this have anything to do with unpaid government workers stretched thin?
11
Starfox-sf Mar 23, 2026 +92
No, but understaffed and overworked government workers
92
[deleted] Mar 23, 2026 +30
[removed]
30
Starfox-sf Mar 23, 2026 +3
Especially when infrastructure upgrades and proper staffing gets labeled as “wasteful spending”…
3
Mego1989 Mar 23, 2026 +18
ATC employees have been overworked and stretched thin for a very long time. It had nothing to do with the shutdown.
18
False-Ad1432 Mar 23, 2026 +1
Getting downvoted for asking a question lol, good to know, thanks!
1
boost_deuce Mar 23, 2026 +644
ATC cleared a fire truck to cross the runway not realizing the CRJ was on short final. Tragic.
644
InfallibleTheory Mar 23, 2026 +243
It’ll be interesting to see— the same controller was working both frequencies, so he gave the landing clearance and crossing clearance
243
ViciousNakedMoleRat Mar 23, 2026 +254
It's honestly scandalous that a single guy has to cover both ground and tower at an airport like LaGuardia. The system is completely fucked, but that poor guy is going to think for the rest of his life that he should've seen this. Similar shit happens in hospitals, where people are being overworked because of understaffing and then the doctors and nurses are the ones who feel guilty and can't sleep at night because a patient fell through the cracks or because a mistake happened at the end of a shift.
254
ALA02 Mar 23, 2026 +90
The people who look to squeeze pennies out of vital services where people’s health and lives are at risk, are the most despicably evil people in the world.
90
mrdsensei1 Mar 23, 2026 +4
Yep and paid the most to do so…
4
ScarlettPixl Mar 23, 2026 +101
Consequences of the FAA funding cuts by the orange idiot
101
nutsygenius Mar 23, 2026 +8
Except, it was clear when he said "2384, proceed in" once he found the gate for it. It wasn't meant for the truck. But the truck was moving in, then the "stop truck 1" by controller was too late.
8
ZealotsReward444 Mar 23, 2026 +180
So the plane hit the firetruck during landing?
180
boost_deuce Mar 23, 2026 -69
Yes, fire truck was cleared to cross but the plane was on short final
-69
scrabapple Mar 23, 2026 +282
We do not know what short final means
282
Jmudge Mar 23, 2026 +138
It means a mile or 2 out with the gear down with landing imminent.
138
boost_deuce Mar 23, 2026 +103
Final approach is when the plane is on its last “leg” for landing. Short final means it is very close to landing.
103
witchofpain Mar 23, 2026 +8
Oh shit. Those planes come in fast on landing. I thought maybe it was taxiing to take off. Yikes.
8
Bedhappy Mar 23, 2026 +44
Imagine touching your plane down on a runway for a landing and in the process of decelerating a f****** fire truck appears in front of you.
44
_johnning Mar 23, 2026 +17
Would have me in GTA saying that’s some bullshit. Imagine how these pilots felt 
17
Garvilan Mar 23, 2026 -9
Doesn't take a lot to figure out that "short final" means "final approach" or "landing" given the full context of this post... 
-9
notkevin_durant Mar 23, 2026 +75
You keep saying “short final”
75
XRAlTED Mar 23, 2026 -35
Yes because in aviation, that's what it's called.
-35
boost_deuce Mar 23, 2026 -50
Yes, yes I do. It’s a term.
-50
notkevin_durant Mar 23, 2026 -1
You’re being downvoted because it isn’t a common term, but you are using it as one.
-1
Theemuts Mar 23, 2026 -5
Why the f*** is this down voted? Is the whole world too stupid to Google something for five seconds now?
-5
jestate Mar 23, 2026 +39
Because this isn't r/aviation. It's better to minimise industry jargon in a general sub so that people can understand you more easily.
39
Krillin113 Mar 23, 2026 +1
Sure, but anyone with 2 brain cells should be able to piece together that short final means something like short final approach or something, ie a situation where they cannot back out anymore
1
MxMirdan Mar 23, 2026 +7
It’s actually not entirely clear to a layperson what “on short final.” You have to have the knowledge to make the connection that “final” is connected to the phrase “final approach” — but how does short modify final? Does it mean that their final approach requires a shorter stopping distance? Does it relate to their altitude or how they plan to descend? Is it that the plane has a limited amount of time to get on the ground, so procedures are shortened? There’s a bunch of things that one could assume the expression means — jargon is clear to people within the system because they are within the system. It’s not always obvious to those outside of the system. I assumed from context that it had something to do with there not being enough time. Based on the definitions given here, I now suspect it means something akin to “landing imminently,” but I still don’t know if the expression means that there wasn’t enough time to abort the landing and go around if ATC had realized sooner. Life’s clearer in general forums when we don’t use jargon, or when we translate it when we use it.
7
Bizarrebazaars Mar 23, 2026 +1
Are you an air traffic controller?
1
ForeverAMemebaser Mar 23, 2026 +60
We need a better system than f****** radios for this. At least some automated check system for crossings
60
fly_awayyy Mar 23, 2026 +122
Yet we’ve kicked this can down the road. We couldn’t even allocate the budget to have one more body in that tower yet we’ve funded a war…
122
njsullyalex Mar 23, 2026 +30
But haven’t you thought about the feelings of those poor defense contractor CEOs?
30
Joe_Baker_bakealot Mar 23, 2026 +11
The problem is more related to recruiting and the training pipeline than funding. It’s a highly skilled job so you can’t just take any bozo off the street, anyone who passes initial screening will need to spend a few months in Oklahoma getting trained, and then there’s no guarantee what airport you’ll end up after that. That onboarding process plus a stressful job with shitty hours has led to shortages more than funding problems.
11
glasswings363 Mar 23, 2026 +23
*In addition to* funding problems. They start people as low as $55k a year, median is $137k. [https://www.businessinsider.com/air-traffic-controller-atc-how-much-make-salary-paid-shutdown-2025-11?op=1](https://www.businessinsider.com/air-traffic-controller-atc-how-much-make-salary-paid-shutdown-2025-11?op=1) Double the starting salary and order military recruiters to offer FAA jobs. This is a fixable problem. If more money is needed, charge fees for using busy airspace. NYC and Washington DC are absolute zoos and some kind of congestion charge, maybe - "user fees" is what the idea is called and the private jet lobby **hates** it.
23
fly_awayyy Mar 23, 2026 +1
Nah at this point don’t charge fees these plenty enough in the budget for them to fund ATC properly with all the wasteful spending. Dont penalize GA with user fees that’s already paid in the form of fuel tax.
1
glasswings363 Mar 23, 2026 +1
When VIPs own the plane and hire the pilot that's regulated as general aviation. The majority of GA traffic getting services from NY TRACON is *exactly* VIPs and their air chauffeurs*.* They need to stop hiding behind middle-age Mooney enthusiasts. A business jet with 3 passengers requires at least as much attention as a wide-body carrying 300. (More when GA pilots aren't as familiar with local procedure.) It's unfair to support public services by fuel taxes or ticket fees but that's what we currently do. Personally I think there's a fine argument to keep the vast majority of the national airspace system free of use fees. *Absolutely* continue to make space for the Mooney\* people. But when a hot spot needs rationing then use-fees are the best while hoping for the best is the worst. \*(Mooney the Texas aircraft maker, not the Korean new religious movement)
1
nil_defect_found Mar 23, 2026 +55
I am an Airline Pilot. >At least some automated check system for crossings This exists and has done for years. The below youtube video demonstrates such a runway incursion surveillance system, at Paris CDG. https://youtu.be/KkQilJfOPYw?t=74 The phraseology, procedures and even measurement units used in the US vary MASSIVELY from international standards used in much of the rest of the world. This causes issues when US pilots fly internationally. There are almost 500 differences in how the US does things vs the internationally agreed and generally implemented standards. The deviations list starts at page 39 - https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/media/AIP%20Basic%20dtd%201-22-26.pdf
55
Starfox-sf Mar 23, 2026 +2
Do you think had the ATC called for a go around instead this could have been avoided? Or would it have been made worse?
2
nil_defect_found Mar 23, 2026 +8
I don't know the facts yet, but my immediate reaction would have been way worse, given they were supposedly a long way into the landing roll. Trying to take off again would have just accelerated them into the collision with even more momentum.
8
Starfox-sf Mar 23, 2026 +1
Basing my thoughts by this video: https://youtu.be/X8guQVvXo3g Once the runway incursion occurred seems like telling Truck 1 to stop would’ve made little difference.
1
Oregon-Pilot Mar 23, 2026 +15
There kind of is. There’s a system called Runway Status Lights in which there are red lights that will turn on in front of taxiway runway crossings when the system senses an airplane on the runway. It also will illuminate in front of pilots waiting in position on the runway before they takeoff. I am curious what the NTSB will find out in regards to those status lights for this accident. More here if you’re interested: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/rwsl
15
ForeverAMemebaser Mar 23, 2026 +2
Interesting, thanks.
2
Doom2pro Mar 23, 2026 +1
We still have power and data lines strung up above the ground on power polls instead of buried underground like in big urban areas. We are a joke.
1
SimpleEmu198 Mar 23, 2026 -24
Oof... ATC stuff up... Tenerife Airport Disaster 2.0.
-24
sean_themighty Mar 23, 2026 +46
Not remotely on the scale of Tenerife and basically every variable outside “there was a collision of some kind at an airport” is completely different.
46
Lonely-Prize-1662 Mar 23, 2026 +20
Tenerife also doesnt happen if the KLM pilot wasnt in such a hurry and his crew had actually stopped him when he didnt have clearance to go.
20
ForeverAMemebaser Mar 23, 2026 +23
Tenerife was mostly the pilot not ATC no?
23
TheLizardKing89 Mar 23, 2026 +16
Yes. The KLM captain took off without having been given clearance.
16
WhyModsLoveModi Mar 23, 2026 +8
Tenerife was because of an inpatient KLM pilot, not ATC. 
8
Gramis Mar 23, 2026 +70
https://x.com/thenewarea51/status/2035926457394876837 ATC Audio of the collision
70
Rambler_Hoss Mar 23, 2026 +132
The entire cockpit is destroyed so the two fatalities is definitely the pilots.
132
320sim Mar 23, 2026 +29
Right now NBC is reporting serious injuries to the captain and first officer
29
kylemk16 Mar 23, 2026 +27
if unable to contact next of kin they may hold off on reporting deaths. its almost 2am on that side of the country so could be 6 hours before the first official death is reported
27
A1ienspacebats Mar 23, 2026 +16
You don't think it was anyone in the firetruck a whole damn plane hit?
16
Siluri Mar 23, 2026 +56
The airport firetruck (ARFF) is not like the typical municipal fire engines. it can weigh almost as much as the plane itself and have 6 to 8 wheels. its more like a tank than a truck. i think the truck crew have better odds than the pilots.
56
poco Mar 23, 2026 +6
>. it can weigh almost as much as the plane itself and have 6 to 8 wheels For some reason my brain imagined that you meant steering wheels. I was picturing each fireman steering a separate section of the truck, like sections of a caterpillar.
6
Cyrius Mar 23, 2026 +2
A ["tractor-drawn aerial" ladder truck](https://www.piercemfg.com/hs-fs/hubfs/Blog/Blog%20-%20A%20Complete%20Guide%20to%20Tractor%20Drawn%20Aerial%20Fire%20Trucks/tractor-drawn-aerial-jackknife.jpg) has a second driver at the back who steers the rear axle. Not what would have been involved in this collision though.
2
Trepanation87 Mar 23, 2026 +17
Depends. If it hit the back half of the fire truck it would make sense that they survived.
17
ALA02 Mar 23, 2026 +2
The firetruck is basically a tank, meanwhile the CRJ is a lightweight regional airliner that is essentially a pointy tin can with wings. Passenger airliners just aren’t built to be impact-resistant with anything bigger or heavier than a large bird, and this is a small airliner so is even more fragile.
2
qtx Mar 23, 2026 +3
A plane is not built to withstand a 'normal' traffic accident, it has no crumple zones. A fire truck, and especially a special one like the ones used at airports, are basically tanks.
3
Matuteg Mar 23, 2026 +45
Article is wrong tho. The collision was at a much higher speed. The speed they are showing is after collision
45
maybesami Mar 23, 2026 +10
"Flightradar24 data shows that the CRJ-900's last recorded ground speed was 21 kts, although its speed at the time of impact will almost certainly have been much higher"
10
Drearydreamy Mar 23, 2026 +13
[NBC New York](https://www.nbcnewyork.com/) is reporting both pilot and copilot have died. RIP
13
saseg Mar 23, 2026 +144
I was in row 4 of the Southwest plane that landed directly before this. I saw the firetrucks lined up and waiting to cross the runway as we were landing. One different decision on the landing order…. 
144
problematicbirds Mar 23, 2026 +6
Please take care of yourself. This is a traumatizing event for any witnesses. Please also consider reaching out to witness@NTSB.gov if you saw anything; it could help the investigation and help prevent this from happening again.
6
ClasherChief Mar 23, 2026 +125
80 mph collision of a landing plane into a moving firetruck; so tragic. Like what happened in D.C., such news in a normal administration would result in changes to the system. Sadly, nothing will happen, and things will just get worse as more corners are cut with people in charge who don't care.
125
blaaaargh811 Mar 23, 2026 +59
I’m sure he’ll blame it on Canada having inferior pilots or some shit.
59
dostoevsky4evah Mar 23, 2026 +4
More likely than not
4
RadicalOrganizer Mar 23, 2026 +28
Or we'll get some insane version of change. It'll all be AI and poorly made AI at that.
28
RoaringPity Mar 23, 2026 +10
Or the pilot/traffic controller/ firefighter didn’t ‘look’ fit for their role
10
RayzTheRoof Mar 23, 2026 +6
I'm worried about what will happen after this administration, because they've screwed so many areas of society that some will be forgotten or not urgently remedied.
6
CatsEqualLife Mar 23, 2026 +4
At this rate, I’m not sure I’m ever going to fly again. Like I will plan a four-day road trip before I even consider it.
4
Joe_Baker_bakealot Mar 23, 2026 +1
FWIW The FAA has ended visual separation of helicopters crossing arrival/departure paths in Class C and B airspaces (those are the busiest airspace classifications.) I.e. Helicopters need ATC control when crossing and can no longer rely on visuals to keep separation.
1
palmerama Mar 23, 2026 +47
Are ATC also on partial shutdown?
47
Call555JackChop Mar 23, 2026 +47
I believe they’re understaffed by like 3000ish employees still
47
nuixy Mar 23, 2026 +14
That was before the small exodus to Australia. Australia is offering a 2 year path to citizenship and much, much better working conditions for functionally equivalent salaries. Quite a few controllers have taken them up on their offer further reducing ATC numbers. 
14
RandomNumber5147- Mar 23, 2026 +26
No. Just the usual stress than comes with the job.
26
ScarlettPixl Mar 23, 2026 +10
And being severely overworked and underfunded
10
PertinaxWorries Mar 23, 2026 +1
The movie Pushing Tin made me appreciate ATCs and the stress they go through
1
1991mgs Mar 23, 2026 +197
I guess the only reasonable thing to do going forward is to staff the ATC towers with ICE agents
197
furie1335 Mar 23, 2026 +6
LGA closed until 1400
6
unchangingtask Mar 23, 2026 +21
Condolences to the victims of American incompetence. But not surprised as the ATC is under the Department of Transportation with a former Foxnews personnel cosplaying as the “secretary”.
21
NicoRosbot Mar 23, 2026 +22
The number of plane crashes in America caused by basic human error recently is absolutely insane, sending a truck onto a runway with a plane full of passengers landing on is crazy. At this stage I’d feel safer flying into Dubai Airport with missiles flying than any US airport on an ordinary day.
22
ExoticSterby42 Mar 23, 2026 +4
The ground vehicle was a firetruck but reportedly the drivers were policemen and not the airport fire department? Can someone clear this up? If true how are two policemen driving a firetruck around an airport and across the runways?
4
problematicbirds Mar 23, 2026 +3
Port Authority is in charge of the firefighting at this airport and it’s my understanding that the first responders at PA are cross trained as both police-fire/EMS
3
Sorry-Climate-7982 Mar 23, 2026 +1
[simpleflying.com](http://simpleflying.com) has more info.
1
bass248 Mar 23, 2026 +9
This article says it happened Monday evening. So it happened tomorrow or a week ago? Edit: whoever wrote the article doesn't know how to tell time. They said it happened Monday evening instead of Monday morning
9
OilPure5808 Mar 23, 2026 +8
Flightaware says JZA646 landed at 11:38 pm Sunday 3-22-2026.
8
Excellent-Ad-7366 Mar 23, 2026 +11
EST, meaning Monday
11
nat4mat Mar 23, 2026 +1
That’s either early Monday morning or Sunday evening
1
Rebelgecko Mar 23, 2026 +1
Why aren't they using EDT?
1
corsairfanatic Mar 23, 2026 +4
Everybody should just use ET. Using EDT vs EST is never helpful. No one gives a f if we are in daylight savings or not when telling time
4
corsairfanatic Mar 23, 2026
Everybody should just use ET. Using EDT vs EST is never helpful. No one gives a f if we are in daylight savings or not when telling time
0
Long_John_Johnson Mar 23, 2026 +3
It’s been corrected
3
ExpiredExasperation Mar 23, 2026 +13
"Plane hits ground... vehicle." Edit: the initial article suggesting a taxiing plane sideswiped a truck at low speeds seems to have had numerous details wrong, down to even the day of the incident.
13
Zealousideal_Gap_553 Mar 23, 2026 +6
Just another reason to stay out of the US
6
DizzyRhubarb_ Mar 23, 2026 -5
I’m sure Elon is on it and will be offering Starlink and some 20 year olds to replace our entire ATC system again. Maybe the DOGE children can do it.
-5
MOlson_9 Mar 23, 2026 +7
What an odd comment
7
DizzyRhubarb_ Mar 23, 2026 -3
Why is it an odd comment? He talks about ATC endlessly, and it was a major focus of his utterly failed stint at DOGE. [https://simpleflying.com/elon-musk-spacex-faa-air-traffic-control-command/](https://simpleflying.com/elon-musk-spacex-faa-air-traffic-control-command/)
-3
fatbongo Mar 23, 2026 +1
That’s terrible I had the impression that it was a low speed taxiing incident like oh oops Not in a flippant way either Peace and love for the families and loved ones involved
1
Subject-Promise-4796 Mar 23, 2026
Was there an emergency? Why was the fire truck out and about that time of night?
0
RandomNumber5147- Mar 23, 2026 +3
Listen to the atc recording. It explains what was going on and why the firetruck was there.
3
Postom Mar 23, 2026 +4
ATC permitted the Air Canada Jazz jet to land on runway 4. The same controller permitted the fire truck to cross runway 4 1 or 2 seconds later. When he realized his error, he was frantically trying to stop the fire truck from crossing the runway.
4
← Back to Board