Ryanair 738 and American 763 Incident at Barcelona

LeakRate

Serious enough stuff here,seems to be only appearing now even though it happened over a year ago

http://www.avherald.com/h?article=45363621&opt=0

Accident: Ryanair B738 and American B763 at Barcelona on Apr 14th 2011, both aircraft departed despite ground collision and passenger complaints

By Simon Hradecky, created Saturday, Jul 28th 2012 18:21Z, last updated Sunday, Jul 29th 2012 13:29ZAn American Airlines Boeing 767-300, registration N366AA performing flight AA-67 from Barcelona,SP (Spain) to New York JFK,NY (USA), had taxied to the holding point runway 25L and was holding short of the runway.

A Ryanair Boeing 737-800, registration EI-EKB performing flight FR-8136 from Barcelona,SP (Spain) to Ibiza,SP (Spain) with 169 passengers and 6 crew, was taxiing along Barcelona's taxiway K for departure from runway 25L and was maneouvering to pass behind the Boeing 767-300.

A number of passengers on board of the Boeing 737-800 observed the right hand wing of the aircraft contact the tailplane of the Boeing 767-300 and rose out of their seats attracting the attention of a flight attendant. A passenger told the flight attendant, that their aircraft had hit the aircraft besides them. The flight attendant contacted the purser, who instructed her to contact the flight deck, she contacted the flight deck and informed the captain that passengers had seen their aircraft had hit another aircraft. The captain responded however everything was fine and she continued with the takeoff about 2 minutes after the Boeing 767.

Immediately after departure the passengers insisted the flight was not safe and they had collided with another aircraft, one of the passengers identified himself as an engineer. The flight attendant told the engineer that the captain had been informed and had told everything was fine. No further information was forwarded to the flight deck.

After landing in Ibiza, while disembarking, the passengers again spoke up claiming the flight had been unsafe.

During the turnaround the flight attendant informed the purser that one of the passengers observing the collision was an engineer. Neither approached the flight crew however.

Following the return flight FR-8137 the purser talked to the captain and informed her that one of the passengers observing the collision was an engineer.

In the following it was identified that the right hand winglet of the Boeing 737-800 had received damage, the Boeing 767-300 was found with damage to the left hand stabilizer following landing in New York.

Spain's CIAIAC is investigating the occurrence confirming the Boeing 737-800 had contacted a Boeing 767-300 holding short of runway 25L, the Boeing 737-800 had received damage to the right hand winglet and the Boeing 767-300 damage to the left hand stabilizer.

An internal Ryanair document forwarded to The Aviation Herald states, that none of the Ryanair crew members observed anything unusual as the taxiway was rather bumpy, it was only flight attendant #2 who became aware of the collision through the observed passenger reactions.

The damage of the left hand elevator/stabilizer of N366AA, photo taken at stand 41 at JFK (Photo: CIAIAC):

robertxxx

Ryanair pilots would be docked pay if they weren't on time.

Id of pulled the chute!

sparrowcar

Wow. Now that's a story. :eek:

castie

Absolutely crazy stuff.

Love how the fact that the passenger was an engineer makes a difference.
Likely he wouldn't know level of damage any different to a non technical passenger.

I think I would of been arrested in the same situation.
Taken my chance that it would be proven later.
No way would I of let that plane get off the ground with me on-board.

BeardySi

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot??!!!!

That's bad, even for Ryanair, surely a visual inspection and/or confirmation of any damage should have been in order before either aircraft left?

basill

Likely he wouldn't know level of damage any different to a non technical passenger.

Perhaps not but as a pilot I would be much more interested to hear an engineers (assuming he is an aircraft engineer) opinion than a bucket and spader.

Interesting that after all of that they still made it back from Ibiza and nothing showed up on the walkaround on the ground on the Island.

What concerns me most is that as a professional pilot they didn't fess up and let the AA guys/gals know. We rely on a lot of honesty in this game and pireps are a valuable source of information to us. To let them cross the Atlantic with a potential flight control problem is quite unbelievable.

I suspect that there is more to this.

keroseneboy

Is the problem with the corporate cutlure at Ryanair so severe that the flight deck crew ignore a warning of this nature from their collegues in the cabin ? If so, I would call into question Ryanair's competence to hold an AOC.

Shamrock231

keroseneboy wrote: »

Is the problem with the corporate cutlure at Ryanair so severe that the flight deck crew ignore a warning of this nature from their collegues in the cabin ? If so, I would call into question Ryanair's competence to hold an AOC.

Basically yes, base captains at RYR get paid extra if all of the flights under their juristriction get out on time and burn as little fuel as possible. So if you're the captain and you delay the flight, then you're gonna get a strong warning from your base captain, and if you're unlucky enough, you'll get flung of to the opposite corner of Europe to work for a couple of months, where you'll get mostly stand-bys and earn next to no money as you won't be physically flying the aircraft. So no wonder the pilot was reluctant to delay his flight....

Tenger

There may not be a problem with the overall culture but there are definitely some flaws highlighted in this particular case.

-Did the FR B737 follow ground ctrl instructions correctly?
-Did the AA B767 follow ground ctrl instructions correctly?
-Is the tower/ground ctrl at fault?
-How then did 2 aircraft make contact if both followed 'correct' instructions?
-Was the F/O looking at the clearance on the starboard side?
-What were the factors that lead to the flight deck ignoring warnings given to them from the cabin crew?
-Did the purser not transfer the information correctly?
-Did the flight crew not believe the cabin crew?
-Why did the #2 crew member not address the issue directly to the captain on turnaround?

The article says the captain was demoted, I can't believe that he/she is still allowed to fly. Safety is paramount in modern aviation.

EDIT: Having read comments about the turnaround, in fairness to the FR flight crew, if the upper edge of the winglet impacted the underside of the B767 tail then any damage would be pretty difficult to spot from the ground.

bkehoe

basill wrote: »

Interesting that after all of that they still made it back from Ibiza and nothing showed up on the walkaround on the ground on the Island.
.

They were aware of it in Ibiza. The Captain said that during the turnaround in Ibiza that she personally did the walkaround and saw some scratches on the winglet but didn't think them of any significance and didn't call maintenance because there was no Ryanair engineers on the island and they'd have to be flown in. As it happened the damage wasn't significant and when it was inspected it didn't require repairs.

The official report answers most questions raised here (from about page 220); http://www.fomento.gob.es/NR/rdonlyres/9BC12631-9382-4E21-8B5E-C912A63FB4CA/112497/02_2012.pdf

kub

bkehoe wrote: »

They were aware of it in Ibiza. The Captain said that during the turnaround in Ibiza that she personally did the walkaround and saw some scratches on the winglet but didn't think them of any significance and didn't call maintenance because there was no Ryanair engineers on the island and they'd have to be flown in. As it happened the damage wasn't significant and when it was inspected it didn't require repairs.

The official report answers most questions raised here (from about page 220); http://www.fomento.gob.es/NR/rdonlyres/9BC12631-9382-4E21-8B5E-C912A63FB4CA/112497/02_2012.pdf[/QUOTE]

Oh Oh here we go....women drivers and all that, i reckon she is a great flyer though.

kona

Thats stunning. Especially as regards to composite structures, could lead to de lamination, as most people know composites are notorious for looking fine after a impact but being internally damaged.

stopthepanic

Tenger wrote: »

-How then did 2 aircraft make contact if both followed 'correct' instructions?

ATC will issue an instruction, it is up to the pilots to ensure that those instructions are followed safely.

You will regularly hear at Dublin instructions along the lines of 'When the XX aircraft is clear, proceed along etc etc'.

Just because a traffic light goes green it doesn't mean you drive into the car in front of you.

p.s. I do not work for the IAA.

McNulty737

Shamrock231 wrote: »

Basically yes, base captains at RYR get paid extra if all of the flights under their juristriction get out on time and burn as little fuel as possible. So if you're the captain and you delay the flight, then you're gonna get a strong warning from your base captain, and if you're unlucky enough, you'll get flung of to the opposite corner of Europe to work for a couple of months, where you'll get mostly stand-bys and earn next to no money as you won't be physically flying the aircraft. So no wonder the pilot was reluctant to delay his flight....

absolute bollox.

kirving

If the pilot was going to take off after that, I would have opened the door, or at least tried to if I saw it happen. They wouln't take off with a passenger who was willing to try that. Wouldn't really care if I was arrested afterwards.

Shamrock231

McNulty737 wrote: »

absolute bollox.

Absolute truth. Base Captains get paid their bonuses based on the quantity of flights that depart on time, and on the least amount of fuel burnt. It's well known that fuel leagues are in use in Ryanair. And base Captains have been know to bully their Captains as that's what the low-hour cadets grow up used to.

Cessna_Pilot

Shamrock231 wrote: »

Basically yes, base captains at RYR get paid extra if all of the flights under their juristriction get out on time and burn as little fuel as possible. So if you're the captain and you delay the flight, then you're gonna get a strong warning from your base captain, and if you're unlucky enough, you'll get flung of to the opposite corner of Europe to work for a couple of months, where you'll get mostly stand-bys and earn next to no money as you won't be physically flying the aircraft. So no wonder the pilot was reluctant to delay his flight....

What a load of nonsense. Really clutching at straws there.

Su Campu

That holding point G at Barcelona seems very strange, with three individual positions side by side, and the largest aircraft (767) taking up the nearest position (G3) in this incident. Seems logical that, it being the largest aircraft and first in line, it should have been sent to G1. Instead, it was holding at G3, so the others had to pass behind it. Also, as it is a higher cockpit, it was holding further back from the line (50 ft), which made the space even smaller for the 737.

Are there any other airports with such holding points? I've never seen them like that before.

McNulty737

Shamrock231 wrote: »

Absolute truth. Base Captains get paid their bonuses based on the quantity of flights that depart on time, and on the least amount of fuel burnt. It's well known that fuel leagues are in use in Ryanair. And base Captains have been know to bully their Captains as that's what the low-hour cadets grow up used to.

Over the course of a full year, yes, a base's on time performance and fuel burn is analysed and a base captain may get a bonus based on this. However base captains have no authority what so ever over the captains in their base. Most base captains are regarded as arse lickers and a minor nuisance. If you want to take more fuel, for weather or expected delays etc., then you take it and write a reason on the voyage report. If you are delayed, no problem you just write a delay code on the voyage report, and if necessary a small explanation. Base captains have no input, at all, with base transfers or pilot rosters.

To suggest that this captain continued the flight becuase she was scared of a base captain, or that said base captain could transfer her to some other base because she returned to stand after a collision, is....complete bollox. You don't know what youre talking about.

By the way the captain in question was demoted for this incident, by her actual boss - the chief pilot.

pclancy

McNulty737 wrote: »

To suggest that this captain continued the flight becuase she was scared of a base captain, or that said base captain could transfer her to some other base because she returned to stand after a collision, is....complete bollox. You don't know what youre talking about.

I have to agree here Shamrock231, you really shouldnt be making statements like that about any airline. She would not have proceeded if she thought the situation was unsafe....

After reading the report I think the fact the FA tried to dumb down the passengers reports is a leading factor in the captains decision to proceed. The FA only pressed the call chime once instead of the specified three chimes to report a problem and stated that only one passenger had seen the wingtip strike, the captain stated had she known it was multiple passengers reporting a strike she wouldnt have proceeded. Also the 767 was too far back from its holding point making it hard to pass.

Could have happened to any airline regardless of them being a low cost carrier or not.

Davidth88

To me the most serious part of this would be the Ryanair Captain didn't call this up on the radio therefore alerting the AA Crew, in effect she took the decision to fly or not out of their hands.

Potentially she could have been responsible for a horrible incident

I see from the report that Ryanair did contact AA after the incident was reported.

Su Campu

Hmmm....

a) The Captain notes an issue with clearance and specifically asks the FO to get up and check it, and it's so tight that he shouts Stop at one point.

b) Flight attendant, albeit in a casual manner, tells the cockpit that a passenger saw the two planes touching. They dismiss this and continue.

c) A passenger (engineer?) tells the pilots at the end of the flight that contact was made. This was dismissed.

d) The Captain decides to conduct the walkaround herself and notices damage to the wing in question. This was dismissed.


.........All this and she STILL decides to carry on with the return flight? She should have her license taken off her.

Bearcat

Same capt had an over run in prestwick. Glad she's in the right seat now.

An appalling incident in BCL. If the elevator gave control probs for that 767 after take off, I don't want to even go there.

sparrowcar

Su Campu wrote: »

Hmmm....

a) The Captain notes an issue with clearance and specifically asks the FO to get up and check it, and it's so tight that he shouts Stop at one point.

b) Flight attendant, albeit in a casual manner, tells the cockpit that a passenger saw the two planes touching. They dismiss this and continue.

c) A passenger (engineer?) tells the pilots at the end of the flight that contact was made. This was dismissed.

d) The Captain decides to conduct the walkaround herself and notices damage to the wing in question. This was dismissed.


.........All this and she STILL decides to carry on with the return flight? She should have her license taken off her.

Totally agree, She got moved to the right hand seat. She should never be allowed fly a commercial aircraft again IMO.

Technoprisoner

i have to laugh at all the ryanair bashing on here and that the captain continued to fly after the incident. But not once have i seen anything mentioned about the pilot of the other aircraft who also continued on to fly

Davidth88

Technoprisoner wrote: »

i have to laugh at all the ryanair bashing on here and that the captain continued to fly after the incident. But not once have i seen anything mentioned about the pilot of the other aircraft who also continued on to fly

If you read the report , the AA crew were un aware they had been hit.

This makes it even worse that the FR crew / Captain didn't radio in the fact they had possibly ( they had not seen it ) hit another aircraft.

kona

Technoprisoner wrote: »

i have to laugh at all the ryanair bashing on here and that the captain continued to fly after the incident. But not once have i seen anything mentioned about the pilot of the other aircraft who also continued on to fly

I have to laugh that you think the AA crew knew they were hit. If the 737 felt nothing at the wing you can be dam sure the pilots at the front of the 767 didnt feel a impact a hundred odd feet to the rear of the aircraft.

Su Campu

Originally Posted by Technoprisoner
i have to laugh at all the ryanair bashing on here and that the captain continued to fly after the incident. But not once have i seen anything mentioned about the pilot of the other aircraft who also continued on to fly

If all else fails read the report for your facts.

Technoprisoner

to busy to read the report on just going off what was mentioned in the first post

Su Campu

Technoprisoner wrote: »

to busy to read the report on just going off what was mentioned in the first post

Even so, nowhere in that passage does it say the 767 knew there had been contact, so you really should stay quiet unless you have anything useful to post.

Technoprisoner

Su Campu wrote: »

Even so, nowhere in that passage does it say the 767 knew there had been contact, so you really should stay quiet unless you have anything useful to post.

talk about being overly aggressive about something :rolleyes:

who_me

Interesting case, and a bit worrying.

From reading the report, I'm struck by (and sorry in advance for this) how "Irish" the communications by the FA sound, almost apologetic and lacking in confidence. I guess it highlights the importance of relaying the facts to the flight crew and not editing or passing judgement on them prior to passing them on.

That said, why should it matter if it was one passenger who saw it or many? What if a serious incident was spotted by just one passenger? Also, should it be the call of the captain to assess damage prior to the return flight? Surely ANY damage should have set off warning bells in her mind. Could not a photo have been taken and sent back to Barcelona for a quick appraisal?

andy_g

Su Campu wrote: »

Even so, nowhere in that passage does it say the 767 knew there had been contact, so you really should stay quiet unless you have anything useful to post.

Su Campu.

If you have a problem with a user please report it no need to be aggressive here.

zenno

This scenario with ryanair and American Airlines is a no-brainer... Both flights should have been grounded for inspection immideately as both aircraft hit eachother. It seems again that being on tme is more important than the safety of the passengers and crew. To allow yourself as a pilot to dismiss this and simply take off is a blatent disregard to the safety mechanism put in place for airlines.

There should be rigorous questioning to both pilots on both aircraft in relation to this. I find it amazing that the pilots decided to take off and take a chance hoping the damage was superficial, as they knew they were hit according to the passenger but no action was taken. A dangerous example of pilots being put under pressure.

basill

Both aircraft did not "hit each other". Read the report. The FR hit the 767 and didn't fess up.

Don't implicate the AA 767 crew in any of this. They were completely unaware of what had happened when they took off for home.

Davidth88

zenno wrote: »

There should be rigorous questioning to both pilots on both aircraft in relation to this. I find it amazing that the pilots decided to take off and take a chance hoping the damage was superficial, as they knew they were hit according to the passenger but no action was taken. A dangerous example of pilots being put under pressure.

The American crew knew nothing of the incident , the lack of action ( ie radio call ) from the FR crew saw to that.

They are totally blameless in this.

castie

The CIAIAC released one safety recommendation to Spain's AENA to reassess the taxi limitations on taxiway K and holding points G.

The CIAIAC also released one safety recommendation to Ryanair to "reassess those aspects of its training program involving flight and cabin crew communications and address the deficiencies noted, if any. Special emphasis should be placed on the benefits to safety that stem from the effective transmission of information from the passenger cabin to the flight deck."

Avherald updated with the following results.

The CIAIAC reported the B738 captain had asked the first officer to verify separation to the Boeing 767-300 as they were passing along. She steered the aircraft about half a meter to the left of the taxiway center line to ensure separation. The first officer indicated there was no concern as the wingtip passed the tail cone of the 767 however he asked to stop immediately when the wing tip approached the end of the left hand horizontal stabilizer. The captain rose out of her seat to assess the situation and was surprised about the short distance, the first officer assured however the aircraft had not made contact. Shortly thereafter the intercom rang (single chime only, company policy requiring three chimes in case of a serious problem) and the flight attendant said "for your information" leaving the captain under the impression only one passenger had reported contact between the aircraft - she continued to say in the interview that had she been aware of multiple passengers observing the collision she would have reacted differently.

Above suggests to me it was more the FO's fault than the captains.
The FO assured the captain she had not made contact.
The FA then told the captain that a passenger said they did.

Given that it was a bumpy taxiway would it not be reasonable to believe your FO over a single passenger?

Davidth88

castie wrote: »

Avherald updated with the following results.



Above suggests to me it was more the FO's fault than the captains.
The FO assured the captain she had not made contact.
The FA then told the captain that a passenger said they did.

Given that it was a bumpy taxiway would it not be reasonable to believe your FO over a single passenger?

But I would have thought you should err on the side of caution .

castie

Davidth88 wrote: »

But I would have thought you should err on the side of caution .

Yes totally agreed.
My point is that the pilot is coming in for alot of flak when from what im reading the FO has made a massive guess and said it didnt hit.

I think from some of the questions in here and some of the stuff I have overheard while flying I dont know how much faith I would put in what seemingly was a dodgy unsure FA telling me passenger thought they saw us hit another plane.

I once heard a grown man ask his wife while we taxied.

"I dont think the wings are meant to bounce like that. It doesnt look right"

Bearcat

I agree 100% with Milans post.

castie

Milan Cobian wrote: »

There are a long list of f**k ups here.

1) When in doubt, never taxi past. Clearly doubt existed. Deviated 50cm from the taxiway centerline doesn't remove doubt. It's impossible to assess wingtip clearance to that degree so the deviation showed she wasn't happy but equally shows she was taking a risk as such a small deviation is pointless.

2) BCN ATC, like the rest of Spain, is rubbish. The unintelligible rubbish transmission to ground control wasn't going to help and calls into question the English language ability of the crew.

3) Which might explain why the cabin crew report was dismissed. In any case, if such a report is made, at the very least a detailed and rigorous questioning of the crew member is required. Was there a perceived time pressure that this step was ignored?

4) Such a questioning would have revealed more information surely. Yes, the cabin crew's use of procedure wasn't ideal. But a captain must deal with less than ideal comms and at the very least the "danger here" radar should have been active. Particularly as doubt in any case existed.

5) Doubt existed and pax are reporting a collision. This is known to the captain. To rely on the judgement of a 750 hour FO in such potentially damaging situation was bizarre.

6) What's worse is that FR captain then took the decision for the AA captain to continue. It must be reiterated that the AA crew couldn't have known what had happened. So she effectively put the AA's occupants lives at risk, as well as her own aircraft.

7) It defies belief, and Ryanair should face criminal liability for it, that the damage was noted and ignored at the outstation. It's absolutely astonishing and indicative of a deeply flawed safety culture.

8) The Ryanair only went to IBZ. At that point, when the damage was definitely uncovered, the AA would have been not yet over the Atlantic. Again, it's criminal how the information was kept quiet at that point. I imagine the AA capt would rather not have headed out over the ocean knowing his tailplane was damaged.

9) http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/1390.pdf
Same captain.

10) http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/491559-4-ryanair-aircraft-declare-fuel-emergency-same-time.html

Do ryanair have a problem choosing suitable captains?

On 1 the updated Avherald says they did stop and the AA was instructed to move and moved about 10 feet.

Agree with the rest though.
The AA aircraft slipped my thoughts completely. The fact that she had checked the aircraft seen scratches and decided damage to her aircraft wasnt that bad is fine but then to not think "what about the guy i hit?" is crazy!

Bearcat

deplorable sums it up......why the hell is she even in the right seat if this is her modus operandus?

McNulty737

Milan Cobian wrote: »

There are a long list of f**k ups here.

10) http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/491559-4-ryanair-aircraft-declare-fuel-emergency-same-time.html

Do ryanair have a problem choosing suitable captains?

About that Madrid incident....it wasnt just ryanair aircraft declaring fuel emergencies, there was also KLM and other airlines calling in maydays. Have you ever flown into Madrid? Worst ATC in Europe, chaotic at the best of times, downright dangerous with thunderstorms around.

zenno

basill wrote: »

Both aircraft did not "hit each other". Read the report. The FR hit the 767 and didn't fess up.

Don't implicate the AA 767 crew in any of this. They were completely unaware of what had happened when they took off for home.

Then they have nothing to worry about with being questioned. They should still be questioned anyway, procedure.

A Dub in Glasgo

Now I am not an aviator or even know what the proper rules are here but what concerns me most, as a passenger, is that there are markings on the holding points which I presumed are sacrosanct i.e. a pilot when instructed to hold at the point, actually does that. Now it appears to me that the AA pilot decided not to hold at the clearance point thus fouling the taxiway behind. Did he inform ATC that he was fouling the taxiway? Would he need to?

I work in the rail industry in signalling and we go to great pains (& cost!) to provide fouling & flank protection for passing trains, I am genuinely surprised that this appears to be ad hoc in aviation. Have I got this wrong?

bkehoe

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Now I am not an aviator or even know what the proper rules are here but what concerns me most, as a passenger, is that there are markings on the holding points which I presumed are sacrosanct i.e. a pilot when instructed to hold at the point, actually does that. Now it appears to me that the AA pilot decided not to hold at the clearance point thus fouling the taxiway behind. Did he inform ATC that he was fouling the taxiway? Would he need to?

I work in the rail industry in signalling and we go to great pains (& cost!) to provide fouling & flank protection for passing trains, I am genuinely surprised that this appears to be ad hoc in aviation. Have I got this wrong?

If you read the report you'll see that the cockpit cutoff angle in the 767 means the pilot can only see from about 40ft ahead of the nose wheel if sat in the designated position. Most large aircraft have similar cutoff angles. Thus if they get much closer it's guesswork as to the actual position of the nose wheel. The 767 did the safe thing by ensuring they were able to see the point they were instructed to hold short of. It wasn't their concern that due to poor ATC procedures or taxiway design that they were put in a position that would inconvenience aircraft passing behind.

Bearcat

Even if FR got away with not clobbering the 76 tail, they did a very stupid thing by taxying so close behind them re jet eflux. If AA were given line up clearance the thrust from their engines to move would have given FR a good wallop.....

I see it hasnt made any newspapers surprisingly.

A Dub in Glasgo

bkehoe wrote: »

If you read the report you'll see that the cockpit cutoff angle in the 767 means the pilot can only see from about 40ft ahead of the nose wheel if sat in the designated position. Most large aircraft have similar cutoff angles. Thus if they get much closer it's guesswork as to the actual position of the nose wheel. The 767 did the safe thing by ensuring they were able to see the point they were instructed to hold short of. It wasn't their concern that due to poor ATC procedures or taxiway design that they were put in a position that would inconvenience aircraft passing behind.

Yes I did read that - it should be the 767 concern if they foul the taxiway - why would it not be? Why was the much larger 767 asked to hold at a point that everyone here seems to imply the aircraft would be foul as it is too big for the holding point?

castie

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Yes I did read that - it should be the 767 concern if they foul the taxiway - why would it not be? Why was the much larger 767 asked to hold at a point that everyone here seems to imply the aircraft would be foul as it is too big for the holding point?

Distances on the maps I bet would show it shouldn't foul.
But because of general practice not taken into account of only going as far as seeing the hold line then then length taken up by the aircraft increases.

Milan Cobian

Stopped aircraft block taxiways behind all the time, it's perfectly normal, be it because the aircraft is too long not to block the taxiway behind, because of ATC directions, because not everyone pulls up all the way to stop line (in which case ATC will ask the aircraft to move forward if required)....
However, it's entirely the responsibility of the aircraft passing behind to ensure clearance. You don't drive your car into a car stopped ahead of you at a green light just because you think he should be moving.

BeardySi

Also, surely it's better to block the taxiway behind than infringe on the runway ahead?