WestJet at YHZ

Fullflap · Post by **Fullflap** » Mon Dec 26, 2005 8:45 am

I heard that Westjet had some problems at YHZ last night. Don't have many details and reports so far are unconfirmed. I heard they are short a nose gear, can anyone confirm or offer more details.

FF

The Hammer · Post by **The Hammer** » Mon Dec 26, 2005 12:31 pm

I heard it was a wing tip strike!!! YHZ wx was foggy xmas day.

wooden spoon · Post by **wooden spoon** » Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:26 pm

i think the wingtip.had a pax on today who said he was on the westjet flight and they struck a wingtip.no other details.it was pretty soupy last night.

Disco Stu · Post by **Disco Stu** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 6:58 am

It was a wingtip strike:

http://www.herald.ns.ca/Front/473606.html

complexintentions · Post by **complexintentions** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 9:11 am

I would have thought a nacelle would strike before a wingtip. Interesting.

J31 · Post by **J31** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 9:20 am

%#!@ that was close to disaster

55+ · Post by **55+** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 9:36 am

complexintentions wrote:I would have thought a nacelle would strike before a wingtip. Interesting.

Musta had a good angle of bank to strike a wingtip

twinpratts · Post by **twinpratts** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 10:26 am

J31 wrote:%#!@ that was close to disaster

Yeah... life is so unsafe... they should ground all the airplanes (worldwide, i mean) since it was close to being another Hindenberg incident

complexintentions · Post by **complexintentions** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 11:49 am

So are you saying the opposite then, we should just shrug our shoulders and say oh well, a wingtip strike on landing in a -700 is no big deal?! I still say I'll be very interested to know what kind of attitude it would have to be in, for the tip of a wing to be the first thing to strike the ground. Don't know what it would take for something to qualify as a disaster for you, but a 737 cartwheeling down the runway would do it for me...

tripleseven · Post by **tripleseven** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 3:29 pm

I think you would have to have a pretty high deck angle to strike a wingtip before a pod, wouldn't you?. In any case, the crew probably had to make a stop at the local Walmart for some new shorts!

737 Mech · Post by **737 Mech** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 3:39 pm

The WestJet -700 is in the CanJet hangar under repair. The winglet is off and being replaced, the L/H outboard "canoe" was damaged and being replaced and the #1 Slat is ground down and being replaced, no other damage as far as I know.

that was close...........

tonysoprano · Post by **tonysoprano** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 3:59 pm

Wx in the maritimes is very peculiar as many of you know. It is possible to have strong winds in near zero vis. Any of you had this experience? I bet many have. Still though, must have been something to have a big bird like that banking so much so close to the ground. Reminds me of our RJ in Freddie. This one could have been much worse. Glad to see no-one hurt.

Rebel · Post by **Rebel** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 4:38 pm

[quote="tonysoprano"]Wx in the maritimes is very peculiar as many of you know. It is possible to have strong winds in near zero vis. Any of you had this experience? quote]

The only place I know of is Torbay, the rest pale by comparison. Maritime flying can be taxing and very unforgiving.

WJ seems to be having various incidents of late, this one is going to be hard to keep out of the media..

pelmet · Post by **pelmet** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 5:44 pm

http://www.tsb.gc.ca/en/reports/air/200 ... 4a0057.asp

Here is how it happened on a 727.

Rebel · Post by **Rebel** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 6:18 pm

http://www.herald.ns.ca/Front/473606.html

737 Mech · Post by **737 Mech** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 8:00 pm

I wonder if the pilot will be axed....why not a Go-around? I am not a pilot and I don't have all the info on this matter but it seem a bit odd to bank so steeply so low........thoughts?

cyyz · Post by **cyyz** » Tue Dec 27, 2005 8:58 pm

twinpratts wrote:
J31 wrote:%#!@ that was close to disaster
Yeah... life is so unsafe... they should ground all the airplanes (worldwide, i mean) since it was close to being another Hindenberg incident

So are you saying the opposite then, we should just shrug our shoulders and say oh well, a wingtip strike on landing in a -700 is no big deal?!

I want to see how much the lawyers will spin it with remarks like that and lets see what they claim the "trauma" to be at.

Rebel · Post by **Rebel** » Wed Dec 28, 2005 1:37 am

[quote="cyyz

I want to see how much the lawyers will spin it with remarks like that and lets see what they claim the "trauma" to be at.[/quote]

AC had cancelled some flights into Halifax and another one was holding due to weather when the incident occurred. The lawyers will put a spin on it that's for sure.

J31 · Post by **J31** » Wed Dec 28, 2005 8:47 am

twinpratts wrote:
J31 wrote:%#!@ that was close to disaster
Yeah... life is so unsafe... they should ground all the airplanes (worldwide, i mean) since it was close to being another Hindenberg incident

Ok maybe “Disaster” is too strong of a word but you have to admit that things went bad for that crew. They managed to pull it together with only some bent metal and shredded composites

. Hats off to Westjet for dealing with in a professional manner.

I sincerely hope there are no lawsuits over this incident

.

It was a foggy night in Halifax with several aircraft missing on runway 23 Cat II. At the time the RVR for rwy 23 was below 1200 but rwy 14 was right at 1200. A couple of Jazz RJ’s landed on rwy 14 prior to the Westjet flight. As Rebel said an Air Canada flight was holding waiting for the RVR’s to pick up.

A Question for the AC guys: do you limit CAT I landings to 1600 RVR or better?

Rebel · Post by **Rebel** » Wed Dec 28, 2005 9:47 am

Oh I think the lawyers are going to use stronger language then “disaster” in their lawsuits.