Westjet CYHZ

Topics related to accidents, incidents & over due aircraft should be placed in this forum.

Moderators: Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia

co-joe
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3723
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 2:33 am
Location: YYC 230 degree radial at about 10 DME

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by co-joe »

You guys are so quick to make attack personal here. aux gave opinion. He doesn't know what the 738 FCOM or FCTM say. Attack what he says but going after the guy personally, is rude, albeit pretty typical Avcan behaviour.

FYI this is what Boeing says:

"WARNING:
After the reverse thrust levers are moved to the
reverse detent, a full stop landing must be made.
If an engine stays in reverse, safe flight is not
possible."
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by co-joe on Mon Jan 06, 2020 2:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3283
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by AuxBatOn »

GoinVertical wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:34 pm
AuxBatOn wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:18 pm
iflyforpie wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:09 pm The TSB and NTSB have overwhelmingly recommended staying on the ground and accepting a runway overrun rather than attempting a go around from the runway in any high performance aircraft.

Here’s a good example of why you shouldn’t. What’s sad is that the data said they would have left the runway surface at between 23 and 37 knots... coming to a stop within the 1000 feet of grassy runway overrun. Though the aircraft was incorrectly configured for the go around (another risk of doing a quick go around on the runways as precious tarmac is eaten up) the aircraft manufacturer said it wouldn’t have mattered.

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Acc ... AR1101.pdf

Sometimes the biggest risk isn’t committing to a landing.. but refusing to accept a known but contained bad situation by risking a far worse situation.
I’ll disagree with you (and the NTSB in this case). If your aircraft can takeoff on 5,000 ft from 0 kts and you know you won’t make it at the 6K marker, I would go around in a heart beat, if you can conduct a touch and go from (not necessarily in) the landing config. Next time I have sim time in a transport-category jet aircraft, I’ll give it a try.

At least I learned a couple of things today.
Is your takeoff performance published with full landing flaps?

Let's say you can take off in 5000 feet, with full flaps, and you have a 7000 foot runway. You touch down at 1000', and you get on the brakes and reversers deployed by 1500'... you have 500' to make a decision? How long do reverses take to stow? How much distance does that use?

Not to mention that there aren't many non-military airports around with signage showing runway length remaining...

There is a reason that the recommendation is to commit to the landing once you've thrown the anchors out...

CF18 or something with gobs of power is a different story, I'm sure.
Even if it is not published, you can always throw the flaps to the proper configuration. Admittedly, this is something I assume is not done regularly during currency training so perhaps my biaises are showing... I rehearsed this in sims regularly and measured the distance from 50 kts to airborne in several conditions...

Just a honest question: what do you do if you experience a brake failure after you deploy the thrust reversers? Ride it out?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Going for the deck at corner
GoinVertical
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 142
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:12 pm

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by GoinVertical »

AuxBatOn wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:43 pm Just a honest question: what do you do if you experience a brake failure after you deploy the thrust reversers? Ride it out?
Apply the emergency / parking brake that uses a different hydraulic system than the regular brakes.
---------- ADS -----------
 
AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3283
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by AuxBatOn »

GoinVertical wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:48 pm
AuxBatOn wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:43 pm Just a honest question: what do you do if you experience a brake failure after you deploy the thrust reversers? Ride it out?
Apply the emergency / parking brake that uses a different hydraulic system than the regular brakes.
I mean, total brake failure. Or is it something with 3+ levels of contingency?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Going for the deck at corner
cjet
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 4:26 pm
Location: yyc

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by cjet »

AuxBatOn wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:43 pm
GoinVertical wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:34 pm
AuxBatOn wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:18 pm

I’ll disagree with you (and the NTSB in this case). If your aircraft can takeoff on 5,000 ft from 0 kts and you know you won’t make it at the 6K marker, I would go around in a heart beat, if you can conduct a touch and go from (not necessarily in) the landing config. Next time I have sim time in a transport-category jet aircraft, I’ll give it a try.

At least I learned a couple of things today.
Is your takeoff performance published with full landing flaps?

Let's say you can take off in 5000 feet, with full flaps, and you have a 7000 foot runway. You touch down at 1000', and you get on the brakes and reversers deployed by 1500'... you have 500' to make a decision? How long do reverses take to stow? How much distance does that use?

Not to mention that there aren't many non-military airports around with signage showing runway length remaining...

There is a reason that the recommendation is to commit to the landing once you've thrown the anchors out...

CF18 or something with gobs of power is a different story, I'm sure.
Even if it is not published, you can always throw the flaps to the proper configuration. Admittedly, this is something I assume is not done regularly during currency training so perhaps my biaises are showing... I rehearsed this in sims regularly and measured the distance from 50 kts to airborne in several conditions...

Just a honest question: what do you do if you experience a brake failure after you deploy the thrust reversers? Ride it out?
Yes
---------- ADS -----------
 
pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5123
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by pelmet »

Hi Aux,

The civilian airliner world is likely much different than the military world. After an infamous 737 crash in Cranbrook where the reversers were stowed for a go-around when a snowplow was sighted with subsequent re-deployment of one of them, all jet airliners were restricted from doing this anymore. That being said, it has happened(after all, it happened in a company of mine to a Douglas product and I have read of other incidents including a widebody where one did not stow again).

Bottom line for airliners with reversers, once deployed, you are riding it out regardless of what subsequently happens, and on almost any contaminated runway, they will be deployed quickly.

More info on the C-17 in terms of go-around options after thrust reverser deployment after landing would be interesting.
---------- ADS -----------
 
AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3283
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by AuxBatOn »

pelmet wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 5:36 pm Hi Aux,

The civilian airliner world is likely much different than the military world. After an infamous 737 crash in Cranbrook where the reversers were stowed for a go-around when a snowplow was sighted with subsequent re-deployment of one of them, all jet airliners were restricted from doing this anymore. That being said, it has happened(after all, it happened in a company of mine to a Douglas product and I have read of other incidents including a widebody where one did not stow again).

Bottom line for airliners with reversers, once deployed, you are riding it out regardless of what subsequently happens, and on almost any contaminated runway, they will be deployed quickly.

More info on the C-17 in terms of go-around options after thrust reverser deployment after landing would be interesting.
Thanks Pelmet. I’ll try and dig it.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Going for the deck at corner
GoinVertical
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 142
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:12 pm

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by GoinVertical »

AuxBatOn wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:50 pm
GoinVertical wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:48 pm
AuxBatOn wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 4:43 pm Just a honest question: what do you do if you experience a brake failure after you deploy the thrust reversers? Ride it out?
Apply the emergency / parking brake that uses a different hydraulic system than the regular brakes.
I mean, total brake failure. Or is it something with 3+ levels of contingency?
Multiple brake assemblies and lines make that pretty unlikely barring a total loss of hydraulic fluid.
---------- ADS -----------
 
GRK2
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 167
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 5:04 am

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by GRK2 »

AuxBatOn wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 5:38 pm
pelmet wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 5:36 pm Hi Aux,

The civilian airliner world is likely much different than the military world. After an infamous 737 crash in Cranbrook where the reversers were stowed for a go-around when a snowplow was sighted with subsequent re-deployment of one of them, all jet airliners were restricted from doing this anymore. That being said, it has happened(after all, it happened in a company of mine to a Douglas product and I have read of other incidents including a widebody where one did not stow again).

Bottom line for airliners with reversers, once deployed, you are riding it out regardless of what subsequently happens, and on almost any contaminated runway, they will be deployed quickly.

More info on the C-17 in terms of go-around options after thrust reverser deployment after landing would be interesting.
Thanks Pelmet. I’ll try and dig it.
While you're looking try the LAUDA B767 crash...not on landing, one deployed while airborne...not a happy ending, it's now practiced during training.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Hugh Jasshole
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 11:21 pm

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by Hugh Jasshole »

On a 737NG there is a mechanical squat switch on the right landing gear scissors. A bowden cable runs up the gear leg into the wheel well and terminates at a hydraulic valve with some electrical switches. Once this cable pulls the valve open, hydraulics can deploy the inner speed brakes on top of the wing. Also electrical switch on valve sends a signal to the PSEU to tell thrust reversers that aircraft is on ground and then the TR's can open. TR's and speed brakes cannot deploy unless right landing gear is compressed (on ground).
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by Hugh Jasshole on Sun Jan 05, 2020 8:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
172_Captain
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:16 pm

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by 172_Captain »

Assuming they’re guilt, what should the punishment be? Considering we’ve already decided that firing the pilots and lynching they’re family was the correct response for those two WS pilots that took out a light at YYZ. Clearly the punishment should fit the crime!
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
telex
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 521
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2016 9:05 pm

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by telex »

Image
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
daedalusx
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 7:51 am

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by daedalusx »

Heavy tailwind/gust
Shitty runway surface condition
Shitty visibility and ceiling
On a -800 which doesn’t have the greatest reputation for its braking/landing performance
And they landed on the shortest runway ...

It doesn’t look like they tried to hold and wait, they just went straight for gusto. 15min before them there was an AC321 that diverted back to YUL, they didn’t even try doing the approach - you’d think it would have clued them in.

What the fu.ck where they thinking?
---------- ADS -----------
 
In twenty years time when your kids ask how you got into flying you want to be able to say "work and determination" not "I just kept taking money from your grandparents for type ratings until someone was stupid enough to give me a job"
plausiblyannonymous
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 206
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2019 12:35 pm

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by plausiblyannonymous »

daedalusx wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 10:52 pm Heavy tailwind/gust
Shitty runway surface condition
Shitty visibility and ceiling
On a -800 which doesn’t have the greatest reputation for its braking/landing performance
And they landed on the shortest runway ...

It doesn’t look like they tried to hold and wait, they just went straight for gusto. 15min before them there was an AC321 that diverted back to YUL, they didn’t even try doing the approach - you’d think it would have clued them in.

What the fu.ck where they thinking?
Well, at least all of the wheels stayed on.
---------- ADS -----------
 
SAR_YQQ
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 657
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 6:03 pm
Location: CANADA

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by SAR_YQQ »

Hey fellas, FWIW multi-engine RCAF pilots don’t ever consider a “go-around” after we have committed to applying TR, propellor reverse, speed brakes, etc. This is not manoeuvre we are trained to perform, nor is it authorized. If any of my pilots were to pontificate this technique, I would be making inroads towards removing their Wings and sending them to work at the CAOC.

Happy New Year.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Victory
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 454
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:32 am

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by Victory »

Ah Halifax. The world's most dangerous airport for airliners.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Eric Janson
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1051
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by Eric Janson »

Just for my curiosity:-

Does dispatch not look at landing distance as part of the pre-departure paperwork?

Is there a requirement to compute landing distance at Canadian carriers?

My company uses the airbus flysmart software - very easy to use. Boeing must have something similar - I was using a laptop for Performance on the 757 in 2001.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business
User avatar
complexintentions
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2137
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:49 pm
Location: of my pants is unknown.

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by complexintentions »

Ho hum. Another winter in Canada, another runway overrun. Glad no one was hurt.

I sure wish I could find that thread with the guy going off about the superiority of Western carriers versus Asian ones vis a vis overruns...but I guess I can understand why he removed his comments! :mrgreen:
---------- ADS -----------
 
I’m still waiting for my white male privilege membership card. Must have gotten lost in the mail.
CFM Symphony
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2014 7:11 pm

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by CFM Symphony »

Hugh Jasshole wrote: Sun Jan 05, 2020 7:07 pm On a 737NG there is a mechanical squat switch on the right landing gear scissors. A bowden cable runs up the gear leg into the wheel well and terminates at a hydraulic valve with some electrical switches. Once this cable pulls the valve open, hydraulics can deploy the inner speed brakes on top of the wing. Also electrical switch on valve sends a signal to the PSEU to tell thrust reversers that aircraft is on ground and then the TR's can open. TR's and speed brakes cannot deploy unless right landing gear is compressed (on ground).
One slight correction:

The 737NG TR can open at or below 10ft Radar Altitude. This is strictly a safety design in case the WOW switch fails, rather than a design promoting TR use in flight. FCOM 7.20.14

Cheers.
CFM
---------- ADS -----------
 
YYZatcboy
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 81
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:12 pm
Location: CYYC

Re: Westjet CYHZ

Post by YYZatcboy »

Eric Janson wrote: Mon Jan 06, 2020 3:17 am Just for my curiosity:-

Does dispatch not look at landing distance as part of the pre-departure paperwork?

Is there a requirement to compute landing distance at Canadian carriers?

My company uses the airbus flysmart software - very easy to use. Boeing must have something similar - I was using a laptop for Performance on the 757 in 2001.

Yes Dispatch in Canada (or the PIC) does but remember for landing performance the only numbers are Dry/Wet, unlike for takeoff where we have contamination levels.

Getting updated RSCs can be like pulling teeth at most airports in Canada. We often get the "nothing has changed so there is no requirement to provide an update" speech. Then when we insist the conditions are often markedly worse.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”