· 45 comments · Save ·
General Mar 24, 2026 at 9:00 PM

US safety agency says tracking system failed at LaGuardia jet collision

Posted by NagiButor

https://www.reuters.com/world/us-safety-agency-says-tracking-system-failed-laguardia-during-jet-collision-2026-03-24/
🚩 Report this post

45 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
Deep_Dust6278 Mar 24, 2026 +91
Listening to NPR news the spokesman said the fire truck didn't have a transponder so perhaps that is why the system didn't work.
91
FillFrontFloor Mar 24, 2026 +24
Seems like it, also it was dark and wet So I don't blame the driver for not seeing the plane in time,. It must have just looked like a distant red blinking light and everything around it was probably pitch black. I guess someone who actually has been to the runway at night can describe how dark it looks especially when it's wet. The whole thing is a terribly and very very unlucky coincidence as far as I see it.
24
security_screw Mar 24, 2026 +26
The ATC recording is heartbreaking. Hoping equipment can be installed on emergency responder vehicles in the local jurisdiction to prevent anything like this from happening in the future.
26
Casen_ Mar 25, 2026 +17
As someone who has worked on airfields for almost 2 decades, it's really hard *not* to see a plane landing. They have very bright landing lights.
17
flightist Mar 25, 2026 +3
It’s really hard to tell how far away or how fast they’re moving though.
3
I_Push_Buttonz Mar 25, 2026 +12
The junction the truck was crossing at also isn't perpendicular with the runway, its like 20 degrees off of a right angle. So when they crossed, the plane wouldn't have been directly out their right side window, it would have been slightly behind them to the right.
12
FillFrontFloor Mar 25, 2026 -7
Really? I didn't know they had la ding lights to be honest. I've seen them take off from the airport but never actually seen the  land or the underside and assumed the only lights where the trail lights from the runway. So then the driver just simply didn't bother looking at his/her right while approaching?
-7
SomethingAboutUsers Mar 25, 2026 +9
The plane was travelling at 100mph or so when it collided with the truck. At night, a light moving that fast (because that's probably all the driver could see) won't appear to be moving that fast. One blink and suddenly it's on you. Driver probably saw the plane lights, but had been cleared by ATC to cross the runway so assumed it was safe. Additional safety systems could definitely have helped, but what's really needed is for ATC to not have 1 person working 2 positions. Maybe it's fine most of the time, but it was inevitable that something like this should happen when the workload spikes. The controller was dealing with a prior emergency (which is why the fire truck was out there in the first place) and controlling ground *and* approach and for the exact same reason you don't wear a seatbelt for all the times you don't need one, you don't have all positions manned for the times you don't need them.
9
BigJellyfish1906 Mar 25, 2026 +8
That’s no excuse. Anyone driving on an airport knows that you need to positively visually clear the approach path before you enter a runway. If there’s something preventing them from being able to visually see it, then they need to stop and account for that. Not just barrel forward just because ATC cleared them. 
8
BearelyKoalified Mar 26, 2026 +1
I noticed they also have an odd angle that's usually not allowed in road construction where your blind spot is directly in the incoming traffic direction. I'd suggest they make it 90 degrees if possible like the standard.
1
woodpaulusgnome Mar 25, 2026 +1
If only the driver had been listening to Air Traffic Controller who had implicitly told him to stop driving there would only have been a near miss and not a collision.
1
nocoolN4M3sleft Mar 25, 2026 +5
There are many “if only” situations with this. None of those matter because this happened. What does matter is that the NTSB and FAA put precautions into place to make sure this can’t or won’t happen again. And that LaGuardia, and all applicable airports, make sure their emergency vehicles have the necessary equipment to make these safety systems work properly. Also, probably rewriting/reworking ground vehicle crossing clearances. The government also really needs to find a way to adequately staff the ATC. I think this is the biggest issue of all.
5
woodpaulusgnome Mar 25, 2026 +1
The fact that the driver did not adhere to updated instructions doesn’t help. There could be all manner of protocols and procedures but if people don’t adhere to them fatalities will keep occurring.
1
echothree33 Mar 26, 2026 +2
ATC said the name of another plane and then said stop a bunch of times before saying Truck 1 stop stop stop and by then it was too late. Unfortunately the truck probably didn’t know the original “stop”s were directed at them.
2
The_Shryk Mar 27, 2026 +1
I’m a controller myself and I have a hard time having sympathy for the guy. All the shit you hear about controllers being dickheads to pilots comes from one of the major north east airports like 90% of the time. They’re always so shitty about pilots following rules, and this guy couldn’t follow simple phraseology rules of “hey you, it’s me, *instruction*”
1
Vackberg Mar 25, 2026 -1
When the ATC is going "Uhhhhh" you'd think he's looking at the display showing the runways/taxiways/apron and can see a plane symbol barreling down (via it's transponder/adsb) before giving the ok to cross the runway.
-1
Other-MuscleCar-589 Mar 25, 2026 +58
The tracking system didn’t fail. The FAA simply has not mandated the use of the transponders that this particular tracking system requires order to track ground movement. They only started fielding the system in mid 2024. Use of the transponders is voluntary and encouraged.
58
nocoolN4M3sleft Mar 25, 2026 +7
That’s infuriating. What’s the point of having the system and not requiring the transponders? Especially if the system doesn’t work without them????
7
Pyrozr Mar 25, 2026 +8
Airport Surface Detection Equipment has a primary radar that can see targets without secondary beacon/transponder backup. The problem is due to every airport having radar blindspots due to buildings or terrain. The transponders are supposed to provide not only identification but also provide target data in areas the primary radar is unable to see. I don't know the blindspots at Laguardia but I would have to assume there is one at that spot if the system couldn't see a vehicle the size of a fire truck.
8
Other-MuscleCar-589 Mar 25, 2026 +1
Phased implementation without placing a large financial burden on users. They did the same for ADS-B on aircraft.
1
NATCA-please Mar 25, 2026 +153
Remember everyone who tries to pretend AI could ever do ATC safely, it only takes 1 loose wire for something to not work properly and not have the redundancy to be safe.
153
xynith116 Mar 25, 2026 +27
One loose tuning parameter. Which BTW is all of them because nobody fully understands how neutral networks work. A deterministic, provable software system could hypothetically work for ATC. One that doesn’t use AI. But it’s still good backup to have humans in the loop.
27
[deleted] Mar 25, 2026 -27
[deleted]
-27
Murray38 Mar 25, 2026 +14
Getting a bit ahead of the plot, but I think they’re making the case for when airports are privatized and corporations look to replace ATCs with AI, AI’s proclivity for messing things up will be magnified.
14
twbassist Mar 25, 2026 +4
That's an unreasonably solid and concise summary while touching on the nuance of op making a few logical leaps. Lol
4
calonto Mar 25, 2026 -42
Loose wire? It’s not a f****** ‘79 Chevy you’re talking about.
-42
vemiscellaneous Mar 25, 2026 +17
Well, sure, a loose wire takes camera or sensor out and that lack of input may be accounted for erroneously.
17
xynith116 Mar 25, 2026 +6
Just ask Boeing
6
Melodic_Junket_2031 Mar 26, 2026 -1
Their point is humans are more likely to have a loose wire than this hardware. 
-1
Tobikage1990 Mar 25, 2026 -19
This is an argument to have more robust redundancies in place, not an argument to avoid AI.
-19
miscsb Mar 26, 2026
Don’t know why you’re being downvoted, because this is right
0
Toddcraft Mar 25, 2026 +14
Did the one guy who was doing air traffic AND ground traffic control fail also? Why are we running airports like Subway sandwich shops?
14
Frogblaster77 Mar 25, 2026 +6
Worse than a Subway. Usually at Subway there's two people working up front. Sometimes an additional in the back.
6
Toddcraft Mar 26, 2026 +3
Man, not around here. Usually there's like one 16 year old kid running the whole store. The owners are BRUTAL.
3
junkyardgerard Mar 26, 2026 +6
You'd have to ask your Republican friends and family
6
TwistedTreelineScrub Mar 25, 2026 +13
There was ONE air traffic controller on duty. ONE. This horrible event falls firmly at the feet of those who have been gutting air traffic controller staff for years, including Elon Musk and Donald Trump.
13
andynormancx Mar 25, 2026 +21
They don’t know how many controllers were on duty yet. They specifically said in their latest briefing that there were two controllers in the tower cab, but that they don’t yet know how many were on duty in the building or exactly who was handling which responsibilities.
21
chrisexv6 Mar 25, 2026 +8
Who gave official confirmation of number of controllers at the time?
8
Bobinct Mar 25, 2026
Probably due to cut backs.
0
jacky4566 Mar 27, 2026 +1
Was the safety system, Look both ways before crossing the street?
1
Ok_Vermicelli_7380 Mar 25, 2026 -14
I think it should be mandatory, if it currently isn’t ,to stop and look before entering a runway even if permission is granted.
-14
Other-MuscleCar-589 Mar 25, 2026 +8
It is mandatory. Everyone who drives a vehicle inside the airport movement area is trained that they have a responsibility to look before they go even after receiving clearance from air traffic control.
8
Sreg32 Mar 25, 2026 -7
It looked like that fire truck didn’t stop. I’d think if the pilots saw them early enough, they’d assume they would have stopped first. Pilots had just touched down and busy with landing a plane. Feel awful for those pilots
-7
Other-MuscleCar-589 Mar 25, 2026 +1
They called for clearance while rolling, received the clearance, and then crossed the hold line…there’s no requirement to stop. You don’t have to stop to look….
1
Awesomegcrow Mar 25, 2026 -6
The latest news on this showed how people are trying to blame other people for their own failure from no transponder on the fire truck, Air Traffic controller were told to do anything else even how young the Canadian Pilots were instead of going to the bottom of every reasons and fire everyone responsible for those reasons... I doubt no one is going to get fired for their incompetence ( benefit of Union in Public Service?) and American lives are continually being put in danger because of that.
-6
← Back to Board