Submitted by: Unknown
Picture by: mad crew
-
-
Copy & paste this:
« Previous Children’s Party Idea FAIL | Things That Are Doing It: Ride on a Ride on a Ride Next »
» 101 Failures in Communication
Leave a Reply
Popular FAIL Videos
-
Recent Failures in Communications
Raptor2213 on FAIL Nation: Self Knock-Out… jam_paps on Dating Fails: Choose Wise… Hovey on Engrish Funny: But I’m S… jgcompton on Autocowrecks: Whoa, Baby, I… Joe on Failbook: The Pre-Natal P… Alejandro on WIN!: WWF WIN Kelly on FAIL Nation: Just Because You… Wedigar on Ugliest Tattoos: Tattoo WIN: W… Joe on Failbook: That’s One Sma… TheManBuck on FAIL Nation: First Attempt at … 
Cheezburger Company Blog
Right turn!
375M$ Plane + Idiots = Fail
375M$ wow, you should buy one.
The price is too great for me!
The side says “love at first sight”, gues it wanted to hook up with the building
Actually, it says “love at first flight”
Well I guess this relationship (relationplane?) is never gonna take off now, huh? And now I’m going to miss my business meeting in Bangkok because I will have to be rerouted!
FFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU-
Sure. You wanted to depart from the Le Bourget Airshow, where this happened…
Love is great, isn’t it?
Lol the building wanted to fly so it tried to tag along with the plane.
He didn’t want to pay those great ticket prices.
It says “Love at first flight”.
Seems like that was its first flight alright!
This plane flew many times before this, and is in fact one of the A380 prototypes.
It looks like it says “Love at first flight”.
FIRST at JFK, then Paris. The pilots don’t seem to realise how big this plane is !!
Well you don’t need to blame the Pilots. Every Airport needs to be A380 certified, to allow a A380 to land. Le Bourget was one of the Airports certified, including the Taxiway you see in the Picture up top. Blame the (lazy) french for the expensive FAIL.
This was at an air show. The pilots were trying to demonstrate the plane’s epic size, although this probably isn’t the size demo they were planning. I saw a thing about this on airliners.net days ago, but the thread starter couldn’t find any pics. If you have an A-net account, start a thread for this with a link, please.
It was actually not the flight crew’s fault (this time). The plane was being towed, and the guy driving the tow truck didn’t account for the A380′s massive wingspan.
hmm hope someone yelled duck in there, could be a lot of head aches
What’s amazing is that they were still able to temporary fix it, so it can fly back home 500 miles from the place it happened, get repaired, then fly back to this site to finish the show. I saw it fly over my house two days ago…
You know, this is a plane on a lawn, rammed into a building. The fact that it’s not flipped upside down, on fire, or just outright exploded tells me this is actually a win.
Dude. Not on a lawn.
Also, not exactly rammed. Or a win at all for that matter. A win would have been taxiing to parking without incident. You suck.
Thanks for the unnecessary insult. I was more commenting on the fact that if I were a passenger, and the plane I was on hit a building, I’d be pretty grateful that it wasn’t an outright crash or a death or something. The fact that I’m not a *dead passenger* after “pilot error” or “control tower error” or whatever is the cause would leave me happy… thus, a win. It could have been pilot error right before landing…. “oh crap, we were 100 feet closer to the ground than I thought.”
I bet the last time a woman slapped you in the face you said “Thank you! I’m so grateful you didn’t kick me in the nuts!”.
If that woman was grateful you didn’t kick her in the nuts I’m pretty sure she isn’t a woman.
U MAD?
Well you do suck, you should not make comments like that if you don’t know the story. This happened at an air show and that 380 was going to do a demonstation flight but it had to be cancelled because this crash tore the tip of the wing off. So there would have been no passengers.
what would a penguin know of flying things? insolent little landbound creature.
That’s right, because every comment on FAIL BLOG needs to be factually accurate. We all look at this stuff so that we can get the exact facts on everything, and log them in our personal history books.
I guess Penguins just do things differently. By the way, don’t take the “you suck” bit persoanlly. I was just saying that since you got so upset about the other guy who said that you suck.
No, a win would be if the plane DESTROYED THE BUILDING COMPLETELY.
it’s gay to say somebody “suck” you are probably doing a job on some old schoolmate or the milkman right now, so don’t bother answering this
Come on! it’s a new kind of platform ! don’t be silly !
I swear… I was sitting here, minding my own pilot business, when all of a sudden this building just slams into my wing. I spilled my Coke on my popcorn chicken, too. Someone owes me popcorn chicken.
wow you really do suck.
you should be the failblog mascot
AIRBUSTED
He was just winging it.
Hi Jules! How’s it going?
If this was at the Paris air show, it’s actually an air traffic control fail. According to the news the pilot asked if the taxiway was wide enough for the plane and was told that it was.
but doesn’t the pilot suppose to have eyes witch he can see if there’s enough space to taxi?
They does has eyes unless there’s no one flying the plane. MY GOD, THERE WAS NO ONE FLYING THE PLANE!!!
you mean that there’s no rear-view mirrors or at least closed-circuit tv cameras monitoring such things as the wingtips?
Mirrors would affect the aerodynamics, but cameras wouldn’t be a bad idea. If pilots could see the wings, there would be WAY fewer incidents like this, and the reaction to an incident with an engine would be faster and better if they could see the engine, which the cameras would let them. An EMB-120 crashed once when the pilots couldn’t see that the engine had exploded and they thought it was an ordinary engine failiure.
“Like I said, the taxiway is wide enough for your plane. If you wanted to know if there were any buildings NEXT TO the taxiway, you should have asked me about that.”
“Like I said, the taxiway is wide enough for your plane, if you don’t take the buildings delimiting it into account”… You’re not making much sense, tentacle monster of the abyss.
The taxiway is the paved thing on the ground, and it’s perfectly adequate for that plane. Buildings, trees, telephone poles… not part of the taxiway.
If I’m the air traffic controller, that’s the story I’m sticking to.
I fht ebuildings interfere with the wingspan, then the taxiway is ot wide enough. Period. You fail…
Well yeah the pilot is supposed to see those things but if you look closely the wing hit the building really close to its edge … So it’s a mistake of less than 1 meter compared to the wing span which is about 80 m … So I would say it’s just a really really bad luck.
By the way I heard they consider installing some kind of proximity radar on the wing tips to avoid those things (I think it’s the 3rd incident of this kind involving an A380)
They need to install those little antenna that old people use to park next to curbs.
I am all for a tennis ball hanging from the wingtips.
lol
i call win
I hear that Airbus planes are far too dependent upon automation – might this contribute to pilot error?
No. Seriously think about what you posted there. If they were too dependent on automation then it would be a design fault not a pilot error.
As many of you already mentioned, this happened at Paris Air Show 2011, at Le Bourget Airport (LFPB).
Actually the plane was towed. This is not a mistake from the pilot, but from the ground crew of the airport.
And it is to mention that:
– Airbus managed to have a A380 borrowed from Korean Air for the shows of Monday and Tuesday
– the plane flew to Toulouse Blagnac (LFBO), where are located an Airbus factory, on monday evening to be repaired during the night, and was back at LFPB on tuesday afternoon,
– now on wednesday, the “love at first flight” A380 is back for the air shows.
So from Airbus this is more than a win. Others failed and they managed to cope with that…
I’m sure fanboys may say it’s a win but I’m sure Airbus is calling this anything but.
No honey, I swear…I really am STUCK at work….
There’s something… on the wing. /Shatner
Oh, never mind – the building knocked him off!
Better slogan in the body of the plane “Love at first fail”…
Planes should also have parking sensors
beep beep beep beep
This looks airbussed
yeah, you can tell by the axels
This is an obvious terrorist FAIL!
OMG it’s Bin Laden’s revenge from beyond the grave! Too bad zombie Al Qaeda suicide pilots can’t taxi…
I paid $32.67 for a XBOX 360 and my mom got a 17 inch Toshiba laptop for $94.83 being delivered to our house tomorrow by FedEX. I will never again pay expensive retail prices at stores. I even sold a 46 inch HDTV to my boss for $650 and it only cost me $52.78 to get. Here is the website we using to get all this stuff, GuruBids . com
Ladies and gentlemen, the man who was driving the tow truck.
I love how the winglet is still stuck in the side of the building.
Lt. Commander Block: Yankee Doodle Floppy Disk, this is Foxtrot Zulu Milkshake, checking in at 700 feet, request permission to land.
Jim ‘Wash Out’ Pfaffenbach: Roger that, Foxtrot Zulu Milkshake, you are cleared to land. Welcome to the Mediterranean!
Kent Gregory: Wash Out, is that you?
Jim ‘Wash Out’ Pfaffenbach: You bet, they put me in charge of radar! From now on, I’ll be your eyes on the ground!
http://www.faniq.com/images/blog/c9ac98f88d16443e4fde16cb6a1689ac.jpg
Anybody remember IRT Deadly Roads? I think the A380 totally need spotters during taxi as well.
Women…
666 Votes \,, /.
I’m pretty sure Charlie sheen was in the plane at the time
That plane is so big it’s kind of ridiculous.
Is it possible that a larger fleet with the right mix of smaller planes is more efficient?
No.
Meh, not really, in a little example, if you are going shopping for many things would you rather bring many people to help you carry it? Or just have a nice large shopping cart.. taking many people to a destination at once is much more efficient and it also clears a bit of traffic…
Actually, that is exactly what Boeing has decided with it’s new fleet of 787′s. Boeing spent years researching it and decided that a smaller, more efficient aircraft is the better way to go.
The A380 is a behemoth that will die a slow agonizing death. Incidents like this one will become commonplace…
IT’s A FOTOSHOP FFS
goddam noobs
Aaanndd…thats how you park a plane. Were done here..copy tower?
Airbus …Wins. Building fails XD
I would like to point out something that I think others have missed: That guy evidently kept towing that plane quite a ways after they hit the building.
“Man, why did this thing slow down allofasudden?” *shifts gears*
@AFP: I think if they stopped the plane suddenly, it would kinda er, get crumpled.
Hopefully, we can expect the next generation to have even higher wings, so they can move over the building without touching it…
The building was drunk
FAIL THAT’S NOT A LEG!!!
it’s actually the new Apple corporate HQ
I see what you did there.
Pretty sneaky!
Missed it by ‘that’ much!
Is this how it works? That all negative verbs in the english language have been replaced by “to fail”? This is just a stupid accident, and it’s not the least bit funny
Mer*e…
Screw this propaganda headline. You think this couldn’t just as well happen with a Boeing? Should call this just plane fail. Damn Yankees.
Do a barrel roll.
I have one question why did they build the wall around the wing? If you look at it, it looks like the wing is just going into the wall and sticking out of the other side of the building.
Fail? Given a plane that size either on grass or a small paved path, I’m guessing the plane isn’t where the pilot wanted to be, but is where the pilot had to put it in an emergency. A dinged building and a broken wing is better than a wrecked plane and dead passengers/crew. I could be wrong, though.
be careful saying that… everyone on here will start yelling at you and telling you that you suck for pointing out the bright side.
So the fact that this plane was not in flight and was, in fact, being towed to the tarmac is completely lost on you?
This picture is a fail not because of the clipped wing, but because it’s depicting an Airbus.