Cargojet slide off the end of 08L at YVR

[spkg]

https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comme ... ay_at_yvr/

[boeingboy]

Flap asymmetry...crew declared a PAN. Left the runway at 50 kts.

[karmutzen]

They upgraded the Pan to a Mayday - after they were stopped. I've thought of doing that on some of my crashes, always thought it was frivolous at that point.

https://avherald.com/h?article=5208486a

[digits_]

They upgraded the Pan to a Mayday - after they were stopped. I've thought of doing that on some of my crashes, always thought it was frivolous at that point.

https://avherald.com/h?article=5208486a

Fairly certain that's an SOP requirement. Just because they are stopped doesn't mean they are out of danger.

[‘Bob’]

Why not avail yourself of 08R with 2000 more feet of runway?

[5degrees]

Why not avail yourself of 08R with 2000 more feet of runway?

Says it was closed for overnight work in the avherald article.

[altiplano]

When did they realize the asymmetry? Probably when turned base off the arrival?

Looking at the track log it looks like they go through the localizer and then back to rejoin within 2 minutes. Maybe rushed? Medevac aircraft behind? That's not much time to run the check list and performance. How does CJT get it's landing performance data for abnormals? ACARs? QRH? Did they get the performance numbers right? That's a huge over run. 1/3 of a mile. Not even close. They're almost at the outlet mall.

Glad these guys are safe, this has to be a damn tough thing to go through. Good luck.

Remember to slow down - we're paid by the minute.

Especially tonight out West, sounds like a doozy rolling in out there.

Fly safe.

[boeingboy]

When did they realize the asymmetry? Probably when turned base off the arrival?

Looking at the track log it looks like they go through the localizer and then back to rejoin within 2 minutes. Maybe rushed? Medevac aircraft behind? That's not much time to run the check list and performance. How does CJT get it's landing performance data for abnormals? ACARs? QRH? Did they get the performance numbers right? That's a huge over run. 1/3 of a mile. Not even close. They're almost at the outlet mall.

Glad these guys are safe, this has to be a damn tough thing to go through. Good luck.

Remember to slow down - we're paid by the minute.

Especially tonight out West, sounds like a doozy rolling in out there.

Fly safe.

They got it basically on the downwind. They were vectored out and around the Georgia Strait to run the checklists. ERS was already stationed at M10 and Quebec when they reported to tower on final and got landing clearance. No -one behind them. Live ATC has the audio. You can see the nose is off the ground and other pics have the doors open....so the gear did not collapse as is being reported in the news.

The crew is safe and it looks like she will fly again. Best possible outcome to a crappy situation.

C-GAZI-off-the-runway.jpg (398.7 KiB) Viewed 6730 times

[pelmet]

Certainly a situation where you go around if you end up floating any significant amount or are even a few knots fast or high on glide path below 200 feet.

Wouldn’t surprise me with the regs the way they are, that they did not have enough fuel for a diversion to Seattle, which would be the preferred place to go in a situation like this(I am assuming that as a freighter, they were quite heavy).

What was the reason for the runway closure. Sometimes a runway can be opened for an emergency fairly quickly.

[digits_]

Certainly a situation where you go around if you end up floating any significant amount or are even a few knots fast or high on glide path below 200 feet.

With a flap asymmetry? It didn't specify how bad the asymmetry was, or where it was stuck, but sounds like a situation where you'd want to *avoid* a go-around.

[Blackdog0301]

Flap asymmetry...crew declared a PAN. Left the runway at 50 kts.

ADSB data shows it departing the runway at over 100 knots. You don't go nearly 2000 feet off the runway at 50 knots.

[pelmet]

Certainly a situation where you go around if you end up floating any significant amount or are even a few knots fast or high on glide path below 200 feet.

With a flap asymmetry? It didn't specify how bad the asymmetry was, or where it was stuck, but sounds like a situation where you'd want to *avoid* a go-around.

Haven't flown a 767, but going from memory, it was 2 degrees difference in flap position in another Boeing airliner at which point the flaps would freeze in place, leaving just a slight rolling tendency in the sim.

Still, a consideration worth discussing. Overruns however, can be disastrous.

https://preacherthoughts.blogspot.com/2 ... ronto.html

[Nauclerus]

ADSB data shows it departing the runway at over 100 knots. You don't go nearly 2000 feet off the runway at 50 knots.

This is the ADSB Data I'm seeing. (FlightRadar24, Google Earth)

Time, Altitude, Ground Speed, Distance

09:27:45, 1050 feet, 160 knots, 2.93 nm (from threshold)
09:27:55, 900 feet, 162 knots, 2.49 nm
09:28:04, 750 feet, 165 knots, 2.03 nm
09:28:14, 625 feet, 166 knots, 1.58 nm
09:28:23, 475 feet, 164 knots, 1.15 nm
09:28:32, 325 feet, 166 knots, 0.73 nm
09:28:38, 250 feet, 172 knots, 0.45 nm
09:28:44, 125 feet, 173 knots, 0.17 nm
09:28:54, 25 feet, 169 knots, -8000 feet (from end of runway)
09:29:01, 50 feet, 159 knots, -5967 feet
09:29:09, 50 feet, 147 knots, -4119 feet
09:29:15, 50 feet, 136 knots, -2542 feet
09:29:25, 50 feet, 120 knots, -532 feet
09:29:31, 50 feet, 109 knots, +516 feet (from past end of runway)
09:29:36, 0 feet, 76 knots, +1485 feet
09:29:38, 0 feet, 53 knots, +1661 feet
09:29:41, 0 feet, 27 knots, +1887 feet

There's a video (to big to post here >2.0MB) that pans from the end of the runway to the aircraft and it appears looking at the tire tracks in the dirt that the aircraft didn't make solid ground contact until about 500 feet past the end of the runway.

The B767-300 QRH shows a Non Normal Configuration Landing Distance for a worst case LE SLAT ASYM scenario (5<FLAP<20) with breaking action reported as GOOD to be around 4600 feet (at 340,000 pounds). The ATIS reported the RSC 08L as 5/5/5 100 PCT WET.

Wouldn’t surprise me with the regs the way they are, that they did not have enough fuel for a diversion to Seattle

They reported 23000 pounds of fuel remaining to Vancouver Approach, around 2.5 hours.

Link to LiveATC recording (edited to remove silence and non pertinent comms).

https://vocaroo.com/1b6kwbANU2V1

From the initial report of a problem to ATC until calling being ready for the approach was about 7 minutes.

[VFS]

https://youtu.be/5rgPiV4WxrI?si=rgOetsyMzwgMWRwg


Looks like from this video they still at least had a couple notches of flap out. (Not my video).

[boeingboy]

Flap asymmetry...crew declared a PAN. Left the runway at 50 kts.

ADSB data shows it departing the runway at over 100 knots. You don't go nearly 2000 feet off the runway at 50 knots.

No - you are certainly correct. My initial information came from those who directly talked to the crew right after the incident. It is certainly probable that that was the last info they saw or remembered. Im sure for them it all happened in about 2 seconds.

[digits_]

ADSB data shows it departing the runway at over 100 knots. You don't go nearly 2000 feet off the runway at 50 knots.

This is the ADSB Data I'm seeing. (FlightRadar24, Google Earth)

Time, Altitude, Ground Speed, Distance

09:27:45, 1050 feet, 160 knots, 2.93 nm (from threshold)
09:27:55, 900 feet, 162 knots, 2.49 nm
09:28:04, 750 feet, 165 knots, 2.03 nm
09:28:14, 625 feet, 166 knots, 1.58 nm
09:28:23, 475 feet, 164 knots, 1.15 nm
09:28:32, 325 feet, 166 knots, 0.73 nm
09:28:38, 250 feet, 172 knots, 0.45 nm
09:28:44, 125 feet, 173 knots, 0.17 nm
09:28:54, 25 feet, 169 knots, -8000 feet (from end of runway)
09:29:01, 50 feet, 159 knots, -5967 feet
09:29:09, 50 feet, 147 knots, -4119 feet
09:29:15, 50 feet, 136 knots, -2542 feet
09:29:25, 50 feet, 120 knots, -532 feet
09:29:31, 50 feet, 109 knots, +516 feet (from past end of runway)
09:29:36, 0 feet, 76 knots, +1485 feet
09:29:38, 0 feet, 53 knots, +1661 feet
09:29:41, 0 feet, 27 knots, +1887 feet

How accurate is ADSB data close to the ground?

[digits_]

The recording said leading edge flaps trouble. Could this have affected spoilers/speedbrake deployment?

[co-joe]

Another thread theres a suggestion that this is the second runway excursion on the same aircraft in as many flights. So a flap problem and a brake problem at once possibly? Glad the crew are ok, and glad they didn't land 26R, they'd be getting fished out of the water...

(Technically there was a night between the two events; Sunday night it was getting new brakes and wheels installed from the first off-roading.)

Ah! Thank you for the correction. We'll call it two consecutive "operating" nights then.

[Nauclerus]

How accurate is ADSB data close to the ground?

As a comparison here is a Westjet Boeing 737-800 landing on the same runway 1:20 prior

08:10:24, 325 feet, 133 knots, 0.76 nm (to the threshold)
08:10:30, 250 feet, 133 knots, 0.53 nm
08:10:39, 150 feet, 134 knots, 0.15 nm
08:10:49, 25 feet, 139 knots, 1300 feet (from the thresold)
08:10:58, 0 feet, 127 knots, 3248 feet
08:11:14, 0 feet, 53 knots, 5261 feet
08:11:22, 0 feet, 45 knots, 6348 feet
08:11:30, 0 feet, 34 knots, 6877 feet
08:11:37, 0 feet, 26 knots, 7235 feet (exiting at M5)

I guess we'll see how accurate it is when the report is issued.

[altiplano]

Certainly a situation where you go around if you end up floating any significant amount or are even a few knots fast or high on glide path below 200 feet.

With a flap asymmetry? It didn't specify how bad the asymmetry was, or where it was stuck, but sounds like a situation where you'd want to *avoid* a go-around.

Yeah you want to avoid a go around so touch down on the aim point and get it stopped.

Landing long and fast and going off the end at 100 miles an hour isn't a better result than a go around with asymmetry.

[digits_]

How accurate is ADSB data close to the ground?

As a comparison here is a Westjet Boeing 737-800 landing on the same runway 1:20 prior

08:10:24, 325 feet, 133 knots, 0.76 nm (to the threshold)
08:10:30, 250 feet, 133 knots, 0.53 nm
08:10:39, 150 feet, 134 knots, 0.15 nm
08:10:49, 25 feet, 139 knots, 1300 feet (from the thresold)
08:10:58, 0 feet, 127 knots, 3248 feet
08:11:14, 0 feet, 53 knots, 5261 feet
08:11:22, 0 feet, 45 knots, 6348 feet
08:11:30, 0 feet, 34 knots, 6877 feet
08:11:37, 0 feet, 26 knots, 7235 feet (exiting at M5)

I guess we'll see how accurate it is when the report is issued.

Thanks!

Yikes, that definitely raises a lot of questions regarding the incident log.

[digits_]

Certainly a situation where you go around if you end up floating any significant amount or are even a few knots fast or high on glide path below 200 feet.

With a flap asymmetry? It didn't specify how bad the asymmetry was, or where it was stuck, but sounds like a situation where you'd want to *avoid* a go-around.

Yeah you want to avoid a go around so touch down on the aim point and get it stopped.

Well yes, obviously.

Landing long and fast and going off the end at 100 miles an hour isn't a better result than a go around with asymmetry.

Is that always the case? Are you able to see from the cockpit how big the asymmetry is? Could you realistically expect flight control issues in a plane that size that you'd be worried about flipping over in a full power low airspeed scenario?

I've never flown planes that size. I've flown a few twins where you'd rather crash at the end of the runway instead of going around with asymmetric flaps. I'm wondering if that might have been in the back of their mind and influence their decision to (not) go around.

[DrSAR]

ADSB data in graphical form as reported above (@Nauclerus) seems consistent with other observations:
Fast arrival, very little braking action on the runway, left the end quite fast,
aggressive slowdown in the muck only happened about 500ft *after* leaving the runway.

Also, WJ accomplished much higher decel on same runway 80min prior.

RWY-departure-08L-CYVR.png (18.6 KiB) Viewed 5139 times

Also 08R wouldn't have helped much and there is less distance to streets behind the end, so maybe having to use 08L was not so bad after all. I'm glad all are (physically) unscathed.

[altiplano]

With a flap asymmetry? It didn't specify how bad the asymmetry was, or where it was stuck, but sounds like a situation where you'd want to *avoid* a go-around.

Yeah you want to avoid a go around so touch down on the aim point and get it stopped.

Well yes, obviously.

Landing long and fast and going off the end at 100 miles an hour isn't a better result than a go around with asymmetry.

Is that always the case? Are you able to see from the cockpit how big the asymmetry is? Could you realistically expect flight control issues in a plane that size that you'd be worried about flipping over in a full power low airspeed scenario?

I've never flown planes that size. I've flown a few twins where you'd rather crash at the end of the runway instead of going around with asymmetric flaps. I'm wondering if that might have been in the back of their mind and influence their decision to (not) go around.

Short of an uncontrollable fire, out of gas, or a completely unflyable aircraft that you have just barely made it back to an airport environment with, going around is preferred to exiting the runway at 100 miles an hour.

This is an abnormal situation that they didn't declare a mayday on. The aircraft recognizes asymmetry and inhibits it quite quickly preventing an extreme problem with controllability.

In both leading and trailing edge flap asymmetry conditions, Boeing FCTM specifies that normal bank angle maneuver capabilities are available. They also advise to not float or hold the aircraft off to bleed off speed or achieve a soft touchdown which can lead to tail strike or overrun. Flare it just enough and plant it on. Boeing also advises that go around is available in these conditions and has notes regarding indications in the event of.

I'm glad these guys are safe. Clearly CJT MTC needs to step it up rather than leaving guys out there with recurring issues like this.

[digits_]

Yeah you want to avoid a go around so touch down on the aim point and get it stopped.

Well yes, obviously.

Landing long and fast and going off the end at 100 miles an hour isn't a better result than a go around with asymmetry.

Is that always the case? Are you able to see from the cockpit how big the asymmetry is? Could you realistically expect flight control issues in a plane that size that you'd be worried about flipping over in a full power low airspeed scenario?

I've never flown planes that size. I've flown a few twins where you'd rather crash at the end of the runway instead of going around with asymmetric flaps. I'm wondering if that might have been in the back of their mind and influence their decision to (not) go around.

Short of an uncontrollable fire, out of gas, or a completely unflyable aircraft that you have just barely made it back to an airport environment with, going around is preferred to exiting the runway at 100 miles an hour.

This is an abnormal situation that they didn't declare a mayday on. The aircraft recognizes asymmetry and inhibits it quite quickly preventing an extreme problem with controllability.

In both leading and trailing edge flap asymmetry conditions, Boeing FCTM specifies that normal bank angle maneuver capabilities are available. They also advise to not float or hold the aircraft off to bleed off speed or achieve a soft touchdown which can lead to tail strike or overrun. Flare it just enough and plant it on. Boeing also advises that go around is available in these conditions and has notes regarding indications in the event of.

I'm glad these guys are safe. Clearly CJT MTC needs to step it up rather than leaving guys out there with recurring issues like this.

Thanks!