NT Air King Air Accident - Pilot Discussion Thread

[fish4life]

The whole idea behind "I won't declare an emergency because of all the paperwork, and this will likely work out OK" is bogus.

I've called the trucks out and there as zero paperwork, just an explanation on ground when it was all over, and that was the end of it. That explanation to the controller seemed to be more curiosity based than like facing a Spanish Inquisition Interrogator looking for aviation heretics.

So let me add my voice to "Call out the trucks" .... it's a free service.

OFD

I'd have to agree 100% with that, I have never heard of anyone having to do paperwork on the ground other than an SMS report but that would be completed anyway since you had an abnormality and had to return.

[goldeneagle]

Please do not hesitate to call out the emergency equipment!!

We are here on standby all day for you guys.....thats what we get paid for!

Ok, now this may be a dumb question. Assume the trucks were on standby near the threshold for a 26L landing at YVR. Aircraft ends up short, on Russ Baker way as happened in this incident. What route would those trucks take from the threshold to the incident ?

a) Would they plow thru the fence, and go direct ?
b) Would they backtrack to the gate at one of the cargo terminals, then take the road ?

I'm asking, because I have been wondering over the last couple of days, if the trucks were on standby at the threshold, are they equipped and capable of going thru the fences on the approach end, to get directly to the incident location ? Or, would that route end up with trucks tangled in fencing, and unable to reach the incident only a few meters away from trucks disabled by tangled fences ?

[Unit 969]

Just a thought.....

http://wwwapps3.tc.gc.ca/Saf-Sec-Sur/2/ ... -20-51.htm

[enbt]

I found this statement from one of the survivors interesting.

In a telephone interview with CBC News, passenger Loralie Sobolik said the first sign of trouble was a leak she spotted as she was boarding the plane, but said the pilot told her there was nothing to worry about.

[e300d]

Please do not hesitate to call out the emergency equipment!!

We are here on standby all day for you guys.....thats what we get paid for!

Ok, now this may be a dumb question. Assume the trucks were on standby near the threshold for a 26L landing at YVR. Aircraft ends up short, on Russ Baker way as happened in this incident. What route would those trucks take from the threshold to the incident ?

a) Would they plow thru the fence, and go direct ?
b) Would they backtrack to the gate at one of the cargo terminals, then take the road ?

I'm asking, because I have been wondering over the last couple of days, if the trucks were on standby at the threshold, are they equipped and capable of going thru the fences on the approach end, to get directly to the incident location ? Or, would that route end up with trucks tangled in fencing, and unable to reach the incident only a few meters away from trucks disabled by tangled fences ?

I have to dig, but I read in one of the Van Sun articles that one of the trucks ripped right through the fence...

[Redneck_pilot86]

I believe it said that the truck crashed through a gate near the accident and a few others went around the road.

[North Shore]

Please do not hesitate to call out the emergency equipment!!

We are here on standby all day for you guys.....thats what we get paid for! It frustrates us when we find out a pilot had a problem and didn't request our services...not saying thats the case here but i've seen it happen. I've also heard the tower trying to convince someone to declare after an engine failure!

again...if you need us ...do not hesitate to make the call!

AND

The whole idea behind "I won't declare an emergency because of all the paperwork, and this will likely work out OK" is bogus.

I've called the trucks out and there as zero paperwork, just an explanation on ground when it was all over, and that was the end of it. That explanation to the controller seemed to be more curiosity based than like facing a Spanish Inquisition Interrogator looking for aviation heretics.

So let me add my voice to "Call out the trucks" .... it's a free service.

OFD

Given that there seems to be some reticence on our (pilots') behalf to call out the trucks, wouldn't it be better to simply add a page to the Control Tower manual, stating that whenever a pan/mayday/mechanical is issued by an aircraft, the trucks will be dispatched prior to landing?

[The Old Fogducker]

That most likely is the SOP for a Mayday or a Pan .... no separate request for CFR required, you get "full service." The mechanical issue may be what is at the heart of this ... I don't profess to know.

Oscar Fox Delta

[C-FABH]

Please do not hesitate to call out the emergency equipment!!

We are here on standby all day for you guys.....thats what we get paid for!

Ok, now this may be a dumb question. Assume the trucks were on standby near the threshold for a 26L landing at YVR. Aircraft ends up short, on Russ Baker way as happened in this incident. What route would those trucks take from the threshold to the incident ?

a) Would they plow thru the fence, and go direct ?
b) Would they backtrack to the gate at one of the cargo terminals, then take the road ?

I'm asking, because I have been wondering over the last couple of days, if the trucks were on standby at the threshold, are they equipped and capable of going thru the fences on the approach end, to get directly to the incident location ? Or, would that route end up with trucks tangled in fencing, and unable to reach the incident only a few meters away from trucks disabled by tangled fences ?

For rapid response vehicles, direct, absolutely. Not only are specialized ARFF trucks designed to drive through chain-link fences at 70 mph, but they're also capable of flattening most small trees. They're built to handle that.

[FastFlyBy]

Please do not hesitate to call out the emergency equipment!!

We are here on standby all day for you guys.....thats what we get paid for!

Ok, now this may be a dumb question. Assume the trucks were on standby near the threshold for a 26L landing at YVR. Aircraft ends up short, on Russ Baker way as happened in this incident. What route would those trucks take from the threshold to the incident ?

a) Would they plow thru the fence, and go direct ?
b) Would they backtrack to the gate at one of the cargo terminals, then take the road ?

I'm asking, because I have been wondering over the last couple of days, if the trucks were on standby at the threshold, are they equipped and capable of going thru the fences on the approach end, to get directly to the incident location ? Or, would that route end up with trucks tangled in fencing, and unable to reach the incident only a few meters away from trucks disabled by tangled fences ?

For rapid response vehicles, direct, absolutely. Not only are specialized ARFF trucks designed to drive through chain-link fences at 70 mph, but they're also capable of flattening most small trees. They're built to handle that.

Lets see if this works, try plugging these into google earth

Initial impact spot: 49.181759, -123.150677
Final resting spot: 49.181738, -123.151160
Gate: 49.18478, -123.150546
Response Centre: 49.195139, -123.188217

The gate is only 400m from where the aircraft ended up.

[cncpc]

Just a thought.....

http://wwwapps3.tc.gc.ca/Saf-Sec-Sur/2/ ... -20-51.htm

That's an interesting bit of research. Your post seems to have gotten lost in the discussion about calling out the trucks.

Does anybody know if this information went to Canadian operators?

[Its What I do]

As far as I can see they didnt get a straight in ???why not??
With a mechanical issue I would hope for a straight in approach .
And such a nice day little wind , why didnt he shut down for a precaution ?
Lots of things make one think ..30 more seconds he would have been on the ground .
If the engine let go 5 minutes earlier he would have been higher and probably been able to shut it down and make a single engine landing ...Damn ..
But what do I know

[RatherBeFlying]

Part of airport design is the provision of frangible emergency gates. ARFF knows where they are and there's reports they crashed through one.

[viccoastdog]

Just a thought.....

http://wwwapps3.tc.gc.ca/Saf-Sec-Sur/2/ ... -20-51.htm

That's an interesting bit of research. Your post seems to have gotten lost in the discussion about calling out the trucks.

Does anybody know if this information went to Canadian operators?

Dude, that link is to a TC website! Every operator knows about it to check for ADs.

[cncpc]

Just a thought.....

http://wwwapps3.tc.gc.ca/Saf-Sec-Sur/2/ ... -20-51.htm

That's an interesting bit of research. Your post seems to have gotten lost in the discussion about calling out the trucks.

Does anybody know if this information went to Canadian operators?

Dude, that link is to a TC website! Every operator knows about it to check for ADs.

Yes, I know, I didn`t quite phrase that the way I wanted to.

Not implying anything untoward. Wan`t even effective till today.

Interesting to know there is a problem with certain parts of the power unit.

[TA/RA]

Way to go Luc! Google images got it right!

[HeadingAltitudeSpeed]

Given that there seems to be some reticence on our (pilots') behalf to call out the trucks, wouldn't it be better to simply add a page to the Control Tower manual, stating that whenever a pan/mayday/mechanical is issued by an aircraft, the trucks will be dispatched prior to landing?

ATC has the ability to declare the emergency for you when you are reluctant. I do it on a routine basis. There is a perception in the community that declaring is a bad thing that involves paperwork and is an inconvenience to everyone if nothing goes wrong. I will echo the words of some of the old timers here. Declare anytime you have a situation that has the potential to get worse. It is far easier for us to assist with a problem that suddenly gets worse when we are already in the picture.

As far as I can see they didnt get a straight in ???why not??
With a mechanical issue I would hope for a straight in approach .
And such a nice day little wind , why didnt he shut down for a precaution ?
Lots of things make one think ..30 more seconds he would have been on the ground .
If the engine let go 5 minutes earlier he would have been higher and probably been able to shut it down and make a single engine landing ...Damn ..
But what do I know

Controllers can call the trucks out without a pilots request as well if there is an indication that there is a potential need for them. Again, if all indications to us is that problems are minor or of a routine nature we won't override. Some operators have been annoyed with trucks at the runway standing by for a minor problem because of the passenger perception of how serious it really was. In my tower days I always called the trucks out. It is much easier for them to assist when they are already out and waiting. I never heard a complaint from them for having to come out early.

Why no straight in? I would guess it is again based on the information relayed to ATC. Returns to airport due to mechanical issues are fairly common. Often as a result of an "indication". Unfortunately with limited information we will generally get you onto finally as quickly as we can while fitting you into the established traffic flows. Unless you give us an indication of something more serious.

Please, never hesitate to declare an emergency. You then have our undivided attention and as much time and space as you need to get yourself safely back to the ground.

[greenasgrass]

The problem with declaring an emergency, is that you not only get the ARFF group underway, but you also just generated a CADOR. There are few worse than being chastised by management for erring on the side of caution. Please don't read into this that I speculate NT Air is this type of operator, they are not. But anyone involved in this industry for any length of time knows of what I speak...

GaG

[ahramin]

Nothing worse than being chastised by management for erring on the side of caution.

Actually, there is far worse than being chastised by management for doing your job properly. For example rolling your plane into a ball. In fact, I can't think of anything that isn't worse. If some idiot in management chastised me for calling out emergency services when it turned out I didn't need it, no big deal. I'd put them in their place, referencing the company's SOPs, OPS Manual, CARs, etc.

[cncpc]

Anyways, re the AD above, CBC ran a story on radio at 1:00 today with a segment from the general manager at NT and he said the company was aware of the AD, complied with it before the effective date, and did not find any of the referenced parts installed.