Twin down at Courtenay Airpark

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

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

User avatar
PilotDAR
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3148
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Near CNJ4 Orillia, Ontario

Re: Twin down at Courtenay Airpark

Post by PilotDAR »

1800 feet is tight for a 310R. I used to do it at Brampton, but I think I had less safety margin than I knew at the time. I got away with it, but that does not make it a good idea...
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: Twin down at Courtenay Airpark

Post by Colonel Sanders »

the departure was too tight
What's that old saying .... "A skilled pilot can
land an airplane somewhere that it can never
be taken off from again" :wink:

My buddy Carlos landed a B737 on a levee
outside of New Orleans (double flameout)
and they had to truck it out - but Southwest
is still flying it after all these years!

See TACA 110. Incredible that no one was
hurt. Not even the airplane, really.
---------- ADS -----------
  

tonyhunt
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 126
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 9:06 pm
Location: CYRO, CYRP

Re: Twin down at Courtenay Airpark

Post by tonyhunt »

Dash-Ate wrote:
170 to xray wrote:http://www.controller.com/listingsdetai ... 265349.htm
May have to adjust the price. :oops:
But that'll buff right out. :rolleyes:
Or just destroy the photos and deny it ever happened ....

CADORS 2013P1373
http://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/Saf-Sec-Sur/2/c ... d2013P1373
"At 1815Z, a 2210545 Ontario Inc. Cessna T310R (C-GKWC) from Victoria, BC (CYYJ) to Courtenay Airpark, BC (CAH3) advised CYKA FIC that he slid off the right hand side of runway 13 (near the end of the runway) at CAH3. No reported injuries or damage to the aircraft."
:?
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
AJV
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 12:30 pm

Re: Twin down at Courtenay Airpark

Post by AJV »

Colonel Sanders wrote:
the departure was too tight
What's that old saying .... "A skilled pilot can
land an airplane somewhere that it can never
be taken off from again" :wink:

My buddy Carlos landed a B737 on a levee
outside of New Orleans (double flameout)
and they had to truck it out - but Southwest
is still flying it after all these years!

See TACA 110. Incredible that no one was
hurt. Not even the airplane, really.
I thought they changed an engine on that one and flew it out using test pilots. (according to what I remember from that episode of Mayday)
---------- ADS -----------
  

beaverbob
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 709
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:34 pm
Location: BC

Re: Twin down at Courtenay Airpark

Post by beaverbob »

Colonel Sanders wrote:
1800 feet of wet asphalt in a C310R?
With

1) VG's (essential, at least for me) and
2) no obstacles on approach and
3) light weight

I'd try it :wink:

Easy.
---------- ADS -----------
  

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4544
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Twin down at Courtenay Airpark

Post by pelmet »

AJV wrote:
Colonel Sanders wrote:
the departure was too tight
What's that old saying .... "A skilled pilot can
land an airplane somewhere that it can never
be taken off from again" :wink:

My buddy Carlos landed a B737 on a levee
outside of New Orleans (double flameout)
and they had to truck it out - but Southwest
is still flying it after all these years!

See TACA 110. Incredible that no one was
hurt. Not even the airplane, really.
I thought they changed an engine on that one and flew it out using test pilots. (according to what I remember from that episode of Mayday)

They did fly it out. A good lesson on avoiding flying through very heavy precipitation. Even if it usually works, why not give extra clearance to it. Even just heavy ice crystals have been flaming out engines. Best to avoid when possible.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: Twin down at Courtenay Airpark

Post by Colonel Sanders »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TACA_Fligh ... mendations
NTSB investigators determined that the aircraft had inadvertently flown into a level 4 thunderstorm and that water ingestion had caused both engines to flame out despite their being certified as meeting Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) standards for water ingestion.

In order to avoid similar problems in the future, CFMI modified the CFM56 engine by adding a sensor to force the combustor to continuously ignite under heavy rain and/or hail conditions. Other modifications were made to the engine nose cone and the spacing of the fan blades in order to better deflect hail away from the engine core. Also, additional bleed doors were added to drain more water from the engine.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Brown Bear
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 657
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 1:17 pm

Re: Twin down at Courtenay Airpark

Post by Brown Bear »

Big Pistons Forever wrote:The owner and I looked at taking the company Cessna 340 into this airport. We decided against it as getting in was doable but the departure was too tight.

A 340 is not a 310. 1800 feet works for me in a 310....I'd pass it up in 340 though.
:bear: :bear:
---------- ADS -----------
  

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4544
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Twin down at Courtenay Airpark

Post by pelmet »

Colonel Sanders wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TACA_Fligh ... mendations
NTSB investigators determined that the aircraft had inadvertently flown into a level 4 thunderstorm and that water ingestion had caused both engines to flame out despite their being certified as meeting Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) standards for water ingestion.

In order to avoid similar problems in the future, CFMI modified the CFM56 engine by adding a sensor to force the combustor to continuously ignite under heavy rain and/or hail conditions. Other modifications were made to the engine nose cone and the spacing of the fan blades in order to better deflect hail away from the engine core. Also, additional bleed doors were added to drain more water from the engine.
Correct. He was going between two red cells. How close together...we don't know of course, but most level 4 thunderstorms show up quite well on radar and should be given good clearance. Otherwise you might get heavy rain and hail inadvertently. At a minimum....pax won't like it due to turbulence and F/A's could be injured. Bad things happen close to heavy thunderstorms. Turbulence, hail, severe icing, lightning, windshear, heavy precipitation and now even ice crystal icing. Big ones in the tropics may not be nearly as bad as ones in places known for intense CB's such as America. The problem is...usually it is OK when you pass near them. Then every once in a while you get a surprise. No shortage of hail related incidents. Transat wrote off a Tristar due to hail. Best to be a chicken and stay far away.

I remember hearing about a couple of guys that went between a couple of red cells that were not all that far apart. While not all details are known, the turbulence was bad enough that they lost oil pressure in one engine and had to shut it down.

The FAA spelled it out thunderstorm risks more than 30 years ago.

http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/medi ... 00-24B.pdf

Turbine engines have a limit on the amount of water they can ingest. Updrafts are present in many thunderstorms, particularly those in the developing stages. If the updraft velocity in the thunderstorm approaches or exceeds the terminal velocity of the falling raindrops, very high concentrations of water may occur. It is possible that these concentrations can be in excess of the quantity of water turbine engines are designed to ingest. Therefore, severe thunderstorms may contain areas of high water concentration which could result in flameout and/or structural failure of one or more engines.

Remember that while hail always gives a radar echo, it may fall several miles from the nearest visible cloud and hazardous turbulence may extend to as much as 20 miles from the echo edge. Avoid intense or extreme level echoes by at least 20 miles; that is, such echoes should be separated by at least 40 miles before you fly between them. With weaker ethos you can reduce the distance by which you avoid them.


Certainly showed excellent handling skills like the guys in Gimli and the Azores. I wouldn't want to try it.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Last edited by pelmet on Sun Sep 01, 2013 4:32 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Colonel Sanders
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7512
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
Location: Over Macho Grande

Re: Twin down at Courtenay Airpark

Post by Colonel Sanders »

excellent handling skills
Not too many pilots, after a double-flameout, can
glide a Boeing to a landing so gentle that not only
is no one hurt - the aircraft is virtually undamaged.

Even the vaunted Sully (twice Carlos's age at the
time) didn't do quite that well.

Keep in mind that Carlos, in the left seat, was only
29 years old at the time - with only one eye, and
10,000TT. He's a superb stick - we do Central
America airshows together. What he says about
how young airline pilots today are trained, and their
skills and attitudes, is not printable here. Apparently
the fuzzy-cheeked youngsters in the right seat are
shocked when he makes them hand-fly. On raw data!
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Rookie50
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1819
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 6:00 am
Location: Clear of the Active.

Re: Twin down at Courtenay Airpark

Post by Rookie50 »

Yep, awesome job. But, so us GA guys are supposed to "don't (ever) turn off the autopilot", or get castigated if we do. We will likely crash and burn.

Sounds like the best way to keep our skills up is be following the pretty pink line on 2 miles of glass while pushing buttons like a video game, yep.

Let me explain. When one engages the autopilot at 400 agl on every flight on every flight, turns on XM radio, and leave both on for the entire flight, the tendancy is to shut the brain off and become a passenger, watching the video screen like a TV.

Do this every time and hand flying, terrain reading, map reading, and emergency skills atrophy so much, one would be in serious trouble with any glass or autopilot malfunction. Let alone evening knowing where one is within 20 miles without the glass.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5142
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: Twin down at Courtenay Airpark

Post by Big Pistons Forever »

Brown Bear wrote:
Big Pistons Forever wrote:The owner and I looked at taking the company Cessna 340 into this airport. We decided against it as getting in was doable but the departure was too tight.

A 340 is not a 310. 1800 feet works for me in a 310....I'd pass it up in 340 though.
:bear: :bear:
A T310R and a C340 have the same wing and engine, although the 340 is a bit heavier. My thinking on the T310R and the 340 are the same.

Now if we were talking about the cherry C310C that I used to fly,and it was a light load, it would be a different discussion.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Dh8Classic
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 11:30 am

Re: Twin down at Courtenay Airpark

Post by Dh8Classic »

Colonel Sanders wrote:
What's that old saying .... "A skilled pilot can
land an airplane somewhere that it can never
be taken off from again" :wink:
There is another old saying,

"A superior pilot uses his superior judgement to avoid entering situations requiring him to demonstrate his superior skill"

Successful thunderstorm avoidance depends a lot on judgement. We have seen several jet glider pilots with superior skill.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”