Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

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

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

Cliff Jumper
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by Cliff Jumper » Sun Nov 11, 2018 7:12 am

Does it really make sense comparing Halifax to Dubai?

Halifax moves about 4m passengers a year, whereas Dubai moves 88m.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Old fella
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1900
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by Old fella » Sun Nov 11, 2018 8:37 am

HiFlyChick wrote:
Sat Nov 10, 2018 7:54 pm
Putting in more ILSs at this point in time would be as foolish as TC deciding in the last few years to push SCDA approaches. Pre-GPS would've been the time to push SCDA, and pre-GPS would've been the time to install more ILSs (not that I necessarily agree that they should have more ILSs). If operators won't spend the money to upgrade their technology to stuff that's been around for decades, then they should expect to spend the money when their aircraft have to go to their alternate (that the pilot's didn't go to the alternate is another problem altogether).
YHZ is my neck of the woods, although been away from the aviation business past number of years I thought ole Robert Stanfield International was adequately covered for approaches. It has 2 ILS which includes a CAT 11 perhaps a CAT111 there now- I don’t keep an update CAP. Also I thought each runway is served with a GPS approach that has WAAS LPV that supports vertical guidance down to 200ft again I may be wrong on that. I do know from yrs back NAV CAN upgraded the many ILS and there was no BC capability so GPS were designed with vertical guidance. I don’t think anybody can blame the airport nor NAV CAN if some airlines and operators do not have the necessary avionics to support what is available at YHZ.
---------- ADS -----------
  

tbaylx
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 732
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 6:30 pm

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by tbaylx » Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:19 am

ILS's are going the way of the ndb. Over the next number of years they will be phased out in favour of RNAV RNP approaches. If an airline chooses not to be RNAV capable that will be tantamount to only having an NDB approach available to you today. As pilot's if companies don't give you the necessary equipment to get in in certain weather conditions then that's what we have alternates for.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
rookiepilot
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1437
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by rookiepilot » Sun Nov 11, 2018 2:49 pm

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enginee ... tor_system

Over 100 installed in the US. Not aware of any in Canada.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
HiFlyChick
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 8:27 am

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by HiFlyChick » Sun Nov 11, 2018 3:41 pm

Eric Janson wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:24 am
Agree with you about Halifax - the ILS should be on 32 imho. Adding a few thousand feet would be a good idea as well imho...
Why would they spend all of that money on an ILS on 32, when the RNAV gets you down to 200 AGL?

In terms of extending the length, they just spent a bunch increasing the length of 23....
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Old fella
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1900
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by Old fella » Sun Nov 11, 2018 4:06 pm

tbaylx wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:19 am
ILS's are going the way of the ndb. Over the next number of years they will be phased out in favour of RNAV RNP approaches. If an airline chooses not to be RNAV capable that will be tantamount to only having an NDB approach available to you today. As pilot's if companies don't give you the necessary equipment to get in in certain weather conditions then that's what we have alternates for.
Nav Canada's tech watch publication indicates a 10 yr life-cycle ILS replacement cycle which the last phase to be completed this year(2018) a good many replacements have been done. Not sure ILS is is going the way of NDB approaches yet.An informed source at NC said this life-cycle is good to 2040 as new systems are quite good. Don't think RNAV-RNP is as good as CAT 111 with the various A and B limits but then again there are better informed that me on this.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
HiFlyChick
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 8:27 am

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by HiFlyChick » Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:17 pm

Old fella wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 4:06 pm
...Don't think RNAV-RNP is as good as CAT 111 with the various A and B limits but then again there are better informed that me on this.
Good point about the CAT II and II ILS, Old fella. I had been thinking the same thing as tbaylx, but that's only from my limited perspective of the old garden-variety CAT I - I forgot about the guys with the fancy equipment :)
---------- ADS -----------
  

lostaviator
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 12:42 pm

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by lostaviator » Sun Nov 11, 2018 7:51 pm

They (ILS) are also the main instrument approach at major international hubs. When’s the last time you’ve seen YYZ or LAX advertise Rnavs? They aren’t going anywhere anytime soon.
---------- ADS -----------
  

tbayav8er
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 3:47 pm

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by tbayav8er » Mon Nov 12, 2018 7:26 am

Are they getting closer to achieving lower RNAV RNP minimums? So far the lowest minimums I've seen are about 200' for RNP 0.1, and about 300' for RNP 0.3.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Go Guns
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 963
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 6:22 pm
Location: on my way

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by Go Guns » Mon Nov 12, 2018 7:44 am

You would need 3/4 of a mile and just over 300’ to get in on 32 on anything other than an LPV. Which airlines are doing LPV approaches?

There are RNP approaches that come down to less than 300’, but you still need 3/4 of a mile vis to shoot them. ILS isn’t going anywhere.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
HiFlyChick
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 8:27 am

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by HiFlyChick » Mon Nov 12, 2018 3:10 pm

Go Guns wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 7:44 am
You would need 3/4 of a mile and just over 300’ to get in on 32 on anything other than an LPV. Which airlines are doing LPV approaches?
Are there seriously no airlines doing LPV?
(or did I misread a sarcastic tone that wasn't there? :) )
---------- ADS -----------
  

ehbuddy
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 441
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 7:55 pm
Location: Halifax

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by ehbuddy » Mon Nov 12, 2018 4:33 pm

It would be nice if the Air Museum could snag the cockpit section of it for a static display
---------- ADS -----------
  

Kejidog
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 116
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:55 pm

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by Kejidog » Mon Nov 12, 2018 4:53 pm

ehbuddy wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 4:33 pm
It would be nice if the Air Museum could snag the cockpit section of it for a static display
Wow. Good idea. I wonder if they have the room for it. And anyone thinking the same as you.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
jpilot77
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 505
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 5:11 pm
Location: North of YMX

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by jpilot77 » Mon Nov 12, 2018 5:47 pm

The replacement for ILS is GLS approaches. For instance the GLS approach 4L at EWR shows 200’ and rvr 1800 or 1/2 mile. Supposedly the Cat II and III GLS approaches are being developed.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Welcome to Redneck Airlines. We might not get you there but we'll get you close!

Eric Janson
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 797
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by Eric Janson » Mon Nov 12, 2018 6:04 pm

HiFlyChick wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 3:41 pm
Eric Janson wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:24 am
Agree with you about Halifax - the ILS should be on 32 imho. Adding a few thousand feet would be a good idea as well imho...
Why would they spend all of that money on an ILS on 32, when the RNAV gets you down to 200 AGL?

In terms of extending the length, they just spent a bunch increasing the length of 23....
Since they already have the installation - moving the installation can be done at a fraction of the cost of a new ILS system. Perhaps even upgrade it to a Cat II/III installation.

Perhaps they can attract more operators with both runways the same length.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business

User avatar
rookiepilot
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1437
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by rookiepilot » Mon Nov 12, 2018 8:24 pm

Eric Janson wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 6:04 pm
HiFlyChick wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 3:41 pm
Eric Janson wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:24 am
Agree with you about Halifax - the ILS should be on 32 imho. Adding a few thousand feet would be a good idea as well imho...
Why would they spend all of that money on an ILS on 32, when the RNAV gets you down to 200 AGL?

In terms of extending the length, they just spent a bunch increasing the length of 23....
Since they already have the installation - moving the installation can be done at a fraction of the cost of a new ILS system. Perhaps even upgrade it to a Cat II/III installation.

Perhaps they can attract more operators with both runways the same length.
Funny how this is such a hard concept. Improve the product and actually attract more business!

A foreign concept in Canada.
---------- ADS -----------
  

55+
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 403
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 4:49 pm

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by 55+ » Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:31 am

Eric Janson wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 6:04 pm
HiFlyChick wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 3:41 pm
Eric Janson wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 6:24 am
Agree with you about Halifax - the ILS should be on 32 imho. Adding a few thousand feet would be a good idea as well imho...
Why would they spend all of that money on an ILS on 32, when the RNAV gets you down to 200 AGL?

In terms of extending the length, they just spent a bunch increasing the length of 23....
Since they already have the installation - moving the installation can be done at a fraction of the cost of a new ILS system. Perhaps even upgrade it to a Cat II/III installation.

Perhaps they can attract more operators with both runways the same length.
Perhaps as an airline pilot you are not familiar with certification standards for Canadian Airports(TP-312) nor Instrument Procedure Design Criteria(TP-308). Let me assure you as a person who has been involved( probably just as long as you have been an international airline pilot) and trained in the noted standards and criteria manuals you simply can’t take a system from one end and plunk it down on the other side. There are many variables involved, studies required way to numerous to elaborate here, Categories 11/111 add more layers and complexities on top of it. Kindest regards.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Go Guns
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 963
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 6:22 pm
Location: on my way

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by Go Guns » Tue Nov 13, 2018 9:12 am

HiFlyChick wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 3:10 pm
Go Guns wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 7:44 am
You would need 3/4 of a mile and just over 300’ to get in on 32 on anything other than an LPV. Which airlines are doing LPV approaches?
Are there seriously no airlines doing LPV?
(or did I misread a sarcastic tone that wasn't there? :) )

It was a serious question. I know WestJet does not, but I’m not sure otherwise.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Guilden
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 3:12 pm

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by Guilden » Tue Nov 13, 2018 10:39 am

Encore does LPV approaches..
---------- ADS -----------
  

Jet Jockey
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 290
Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:42 am
Location: CYUL

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by Jet Jockey » Tue Nov 13, 2018 5:11 pm

There are plenty of LPV approaches in Canada with the same minimums as an ILS (200’ AGL DAs and RVR 2600’ or 1/2 mile vis).

Just to name one airport, CYUL, all the following runways have LPV minimums that match their ILS minimums... RWY 06L, 06R, 10, 24L and 24R.

IIRC, in the future (if not already available at certain airports) CAT II AND III minimums will be available with GPS/GNSS/SBAS type systems but they require an additional piece of equipment to be installed at the airport, LAAS or Local Area Augmentation System, now more commonly known as the Ground Based Augmentation System (GBAS).
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Inverted2
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2104
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 7:46 am
Location: Ontario

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by Inverted2 » Tue Nov 13, 2018 5:52 pm

We do LPV approaches at Jazz on the Q400. The whole fleet isn't capable but most are.

On another note did another 747 come and get the crustaceans?
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
HiFlyChick
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 8:27 am

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by HiFlyChick » Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:14 pm

swordfish wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 4:09 pm
In the photographs available, the gear is not visible. Was the gear DOWN? begging the question that how did all 4 get wiped off.
They've been clearing out the debris so that on one side at least the gear is now visible:
---------- ADS -----------
  
Attachments
20181112_154053 (ed).jpg
20181112_154053 (ed).jpg (223.1 KiB) Viewed 1154 times

av8ts
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 8:31 am

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by av8ts » Thu Nov 15, 2018 10:19 am

Jet Jockey wrote:
Tue Nov 13, 2018 5:11 pm
There are plenty of LPV approaches in Canada with the same minimums as an ILS (200’ AGL DAs and RVR 2600’ or 1/2 mile vis).

Just to name one airport, CYUL, all the following runways have LPV minimums that match their ILS minimums... RWY 06L, 06R, 10, 24L and 24R.

IIRC, in the future (if not already available at certain airports) CAT II AND III minimums will be available with GPS/GNSS/SBAS type systems but they require an additional piece of equipment to be installed at the airport, LAAS or Local Area Augmentation System, now more commonly known as the Ground Based Augmentation System (GBAS).
LPV is still considered a non-precision approach.
So for Jazz (not sure if same applies to other companies) on those YUL runways with HGS on Cat 1 ILS we only need 1200 rvr but for LPV we need 1/2m or 2400rvr
---------- ADS -----------
  

Eric Janson
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 797
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by Eric Janson » Thu Nov 15, 2018 11:59 pm

55+ wrote:
Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:31 am
Eric Janson wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 6:04 pm
HiFlyChick wrote:
Sun Nov 11, 2018 3:41 pm


Why would they spend all of that money on an ILS on 32, when the RNAV gets you down to 200 AGL?

In terms of extending the length, they just spent a bunch increasing the length of 23....
Since they already have the installation - moving the installation can be done at a fraction of the cost of a new ILS system. Perhaps even upgrade it to a Cat II/III installation.

Perhaps they can attract more operators with both runways the same length.
Perhaps as an airline pilot you are not familiar with certification standards for Canadian Airports(TP-312) nor Instrument Procedure Design Criteria(TP-308). Let me assure you as a person who has been involved( probably just as long as you have been an international airline pilot) and trained in the noted standards and criteria manuals you simply can’t take a system from one end and plunk it down on the other side. There are many variables involved, studies required way to numerous to elaborate here, Categories 11/111 add more layers and complexities on top of it. Kindest regards.
Thanks for the info - always good to hear from people involved in other aspects of airport operations.

Just a question - since there is an approach to R32 wouldn't a lot of the criteria you refer to already have been completed? Or does that vary with approach type?

All the best.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business

55+
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 403
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 4:49 pm

Re: Skylease Cargo 747 Runway Overrun YHZ Nov 7, 2018

Post by 55+ » Fri Nov 16, 2018 10:03 am

Eric Janson wrote:
Thu Nov 15, 2018 11:59 pm
55+ wrote:
Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:31 am
Eric Janson wrote:
Mon Nov 12, 2018 6:04 pm


Since they already have the installation - moving the installation can be done at a fraction of the cost of a new ILS system. Perhaps even upgrade it to a Cat II/III installation.

Perhaps they can attract more operators with both runways the same length.
Perhaps as an airline pilot you are not familiar with certification standards for Canadian Airports(TP-312) nor Instrument Procedure Design Criteria(TP-308). Let me assure you as a person who has been involved( probably just as long as you have been an international airline pilot) and trained in the noted standards and criteria manuals you simply can’t take a system from one end and plunk it down on the other side. There are many variables involved, studies required way to numerous to elaborate here, Categories 11/111 add more layers and complexities on top of it. Kindest regards.
Thanks for the info - always good to hear from people involved in other aspects of airport operations.

Just a question - since there is an approach to R32 wouldn't a lot of the criteria you refer to already have been completed? Or does that vary with approach type?

All the best.
Yes, especially with Precision Approach designs. Studies on prevailing winds, wx patterns and the like to determine cost effectiveness. Then assessment on rwy certification to ensure the environment meets precision criteria as established in TP-312 aka take off/approach slopes, strip widths and other associated criteria. I would assume the former aka wind and Wx rw 32 was the driving force. Interesting item in YHZ was issues with GP installation rwy 05 due interference with terrain or what was in the ground. I did a stint many years ago at TC Atlantic Regional office and remember discussions on it. To overcome issues the GP slope or angle would have to be raised beyond standard 3.0 deg which would result in a higher HAT. I thought I did hear it would have been close to the BC MDA that was published at the time. There isn’t an ILS rwy 05 at YHZ so I guess issues still dominate. I retired recently so not privy to latest discussions.

On a personal level I do enjoy hearing your commentary as an experienced international wide body expat pilot. It is certainly interesting to hear prospective on flying in different world locations like ME and Pacific Rim to name a few.

Cheers.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”