The airbus crew realized they weren't on final for Kelowna in enough time to do a missed approach. However, the student in the c-150 on final in the reciprical direction had to take evasive action upon seeing the pointy end of the jet coming at him. The TSB report summary was in the safety letter sometime last fall, I believe. Apparently the crew wasn't using the FMS available to them as they approached Kelowna and visually missidentified Vernon.Mitch Cronin wrote:So then show us a picture of the Airbus stuck in Vernon will you?
Canadian Global landed on a drag strip
Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog
-
Mitch Cronin
- Rank 8
- Posts: 914
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:15 am
- Location: Right beside my dog again...
So, unlike these fella's in the Lear in Aruba, that crew recognized their error before settling down. Completely different story.
...aside from just taking a swipe at the boys from Big Red, there's no reason to have even mentioned it in this thread that I can see.
...and while I'm here... for some of you rather vocal folks who like to lambaste the guys who've made mistakes. Do you ever wonder why it is the more senior, more experienced ones aren't so vocal? It's likely because they know how close they've come to the same mistake, or maybe they've even been right there... or they could be next?
...they know better than to throw salt at those sorts of wounds... Nobody is infallible. Remember that when you screw up. It'll help a bit.
...aside from just taking a swipe at the boys from Big Red, there's no reason to have even mentioned it in this thread that I can see.
...and while I'm here... for some of you rather vocal folks who like to lambaste the guys who've made mistakes. Do you ever wonder why it is the more senior, more experienced ones aren't so vocal? It's likely because they know how close they've come to the same mistake, or maybe they've even been right there... or they could be next?
...they know better than to throw salt at those sorts of wounds... Nobody is infallible. Remember that when you screw up. It'll help a bit.
I wasn't trying to roast big red, or anybody. I was correcting the previous poster who insinuated that the aircraft actually landed at Vernon which was not the case. I hope it didn't come across as some sort of slight towards any pilots.
And no, it is probably irrelevant to the Lear occurance and was a cheap shot. But he did bring it up nonetheless, so it really should have been corrected.
And no, it is probably irrelevant to the Lear occurance and was a cheap shot. But he did bring it up nonetheless, so it really should have been corrected.
-
Mitch Cronin
- Rank 8
- Posts: 914
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:15 am
- Location: Right beside my dog again...
I know, I know. I'm not making a judgment, I'm just stating the facts. My wife was working on the lake at the time when the aircraft came screaming by.
By the way, around the same time a TC Citation did the same thing out east with regards to the FMS and hadn't realized their mistake untilll they were actually out of the plane. They fly desks now.
By the way, around the same time a TC Citation did the same thing out east with regards to the FMS and hadn't realized their mistake untilll they were actually out of the plane. They fly desks now.
Flying skills?
I believe landing on the wrong runway negates the "excellent" part of the two pilots flying skills. Hard to have an "excellent" landing at the wrong destination, especially when it's not even an airport. That's really just a controlled crash, really. Not excellent at all.squawk 7600 wrote:Hell, I think the crew should be praised for their excellent flying skills...getting the airplane down on a small strip like that. Also, what makes them even more superior was their ability to make up their own IFR approach and get that puppy on the ground. Max Ward would be proud. On the other hand, their pilot decision making skills and CRM might be in question. This is all assuming they didn't have an emergency.
No way there was an emergency on board, by the way. No way. The authorities stopped the aircraft on the backtrack, ready to take off again.
That's the craziest part of the whole thing. How did you know what your take-off distance is? How can you assure obstacle clearance? What prevents someone from driving out on to the strip as your attempting you take-off? This is clearly a product of some really really unsafe thinking.
Well I’m glad that’s all cleared up! “Got2bsafe” was onboard with the crew, or is one of the crew, and knows for certain that there was no emergency. Guess that leaves me “eating crow”!
Here’s a bit of help with the two areas of concern that you express…
1. How did you know what your take-off distance is?
2. How can you assure obstacle clearance?
With regards to the takeoff distance required, Lear publishes charts for takeoff with flaps 8 and flaps 20. We already determined the drag strip is about 3800 ft. long… so that’s an easy one.
And your concern about obstacle clearance? The crew just completed Orlando to Aruba (1334 miles). If they launched from Orlando with full fuel, they would have about 2200 lbs. of fuel remaining. Taking a guess they didn’t fuel up on the drag strip, so their takeoff weight would be about 14,000 lbs. Even with my limited –35 experience
a 14,000# Lear, at sea level on a VFR day wouldn’t have much difficulty with the “obstacles” that Aruba presents.
So, help us out. Just why did they land there?
Regards,
Gramps
Here’s a bit of help with the two areas of concern that you express…
1. How did you know what your take-off distance is?
2. How can you assure obstacle clearance?
With regards to the takeoff distance required, Lear publishes charts for takeoff with flaps 8 and flaps 20. We already determined the drag strip is about 3800 ft. long… so that’s an easy one.
And your concern about obstacle clearance? The crew just completed Orlando to Aruba (1334 miles). If they launched from Orlando with full fuel, they would have about 2200 lbs. of fuel remaining. Taking a guess they didn’t fuel up on the drag strip, so their takeoff weight would be about 14,000 lbs. Even with my limited –35 experience
a 14,000# Lear, at sea level on a VFR day wouldn’t have much difficulty with the “obstacles” that Aruba presents.So, help us out. Just why did they land there?
Regards,
Gramps
-
complexintentions
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2186
- Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:49 pm
- Location: of my pants is unknown.
If the crew was backtracking to take off again...I seriously doubt they were consulting takeoff charts. Which chart would they have used anyway Gramps? Last I checked the dimensions of dragstrips aren't published in the Jepps. We have the benefit of news reports that give the length of the strip - are you suggesting the crew knew it was 3,800 feet? Or did they just, y'know kinda eyeball it and figger, heck, sorta looks at least as long as Thompson...
You aren't the only one with a whack of time on Lears...and yes the beast will perform better on one engine than most on two...but it's still a cowboy move to take off an off-airport site without some kind of analysis more than "radar power and stand 'er on the tail". The point about it not being a "protected" area (ie runway er dragstrip incursion) is quite valid.
As far as to "Just why did they land there?"...well I guess if anyone could present some sort of plausible reason for that, we wouldn't have this thread would we?
You aren't the only one with a whack of time on Lears...and yes the beast will perform better on one engine than most on two...but it's still a cowboy move to take off an off-airport site without some kind of analysis more than "radar power and stand 'er on the tail". The point about it not being a "protected" area (ie runway er dragstrip incursion) is quite valid.
As far as to "Just why did they land there?"...well I guess if anyone could present some sort of plausible reason for that, we wouldn't have this thread would we?
I’m still waiting for my white male privilege membership card. Must have gotten lost in the mail.
Did a big long post, but thought, you know what... I'll keep out of it till the final results are in.
Time will tell...
Cheers,
Gramps
For "Complex", that would be page P-8 of the QRH.
----------------------------------------------------------
They say "wine gets better with age". It's true... the older I get, the more I like it!
Time will tell...
Cheers,
Gramps
For "Complex", that would be page P-8 of the QRH.
----------------------------------------------------------
They say "wine gets better with age". It's true... the older I get, the more I like it!
I wonder if they lit up the christmas tree when they went by. Bet they were not in the staging area long enough so the probibaly red lighted.
The average pilot, despite the somewhat swaggering exterior, is very much capable of such feelings as love, affection, intimacy and caring.
These feelings just don't involve anyone else.
These feelings just don't involve anyone else.
Obvious..... they couldn't get action from their home base city and so they went for some Aruban Ass!!As far as to "Just why did they land there?"...well I guess if anyone could present some sort of plausible reason for that, we wouldn't have this thread would we?
but the plan didn't work out.Everything comes in threes....
Just for info - not argument
Strange no one has mentioned it yet...
Air Canada landed a 767 on a drag strip instead of the parallelling runway at Gimli Manitoba. Admittedly, circumstances were quite different - the pilots were making the best out of a very poor situation. The aircraft became known as the Gimli Glider. For the information of those who may not know about it:
http://archives.cbc.ca/IDC-1-69-240-115 ... mli_glider
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... y/National
http://www.chemistry.org/portal/a/c/s/1 ... 2_143.html
Air Canada landed a 767 on a drag strip instead of the parallelling runway at Gimli Manitoba. Admittedly, circumstances were quite different - the pilots were making the best out of a very poor situation. The aircraft became known as the Gimli Glider. For the information of those who may not know about it:
http://archives.cbc.ca/IDC-1-69-240-115 ... mli_glider
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... y/National
http://www.chemistry.org/portal/a/c/s/1 ... 2_143.html
The probability of survival is dependent on the angle of arrival.
Re: Just for info - not argument
Actually, and not to gloat, I did mention it in one of the threads on this topic that was pulled....32a wrote:Strange no one has mentioned it yet...
Air Canada landed a 767 on a drag strip instead of the parallelling runway at Gimli Manitoba.
There was more than 1 factor with the Gimli glider and there will no doubt be more than 1 contributing factor to "the Aruba Racer."
We'll see what comes of it.
Ah COM ‘on Gramps, Complex, Leerboy…quit be so politically correct! We all know they screwed up. We’ve all done it or will do it, so what.
Yes, Old Sparky can be all little hyper sometimes, but he’s a good guy deep down and a good driver.
I’m mean shit these guys are driven hard by the “Bad Apple” back in YWG. I think you know the working condition I’m speaking of, so what the hell do ya expect. I can just see the clown huddle, after the call came in…LMFAO.
Do ya think there was any stress debrief…ha. Like Leer boy says “ah shucks guys, ya think ya can press on and get the medivac done. I promise I’ll give ya time off when ya get back”.
I’m just happy they all walked away safely and no one was hurt…I could give two shits about the company though, and the slim balls that are running it.
Next time I’ll tell ya how really feel…
Cheers
Buster
Yes, Old Sparky can be all little hyper sometimes, but he’s a good guy deep down and a good driver.
I’m mean shit these guys are driven hard by the “Bad Apple” back in YWG. I think you know the working condition I’m speaking of, so what the hell do ya expect. I can just see the clown huddle, after the call came in…LMFAO.
Do ya think there was any stress debrief…ha. Like Leer boy says “ah shucks guys, ya think ya can press on and get the medivac done. I promise I’ll give ya time off when ya get back”.
I’m just happy they all walked away safely and no one was hurt…I could give two shits about the company though, and the slim balls that are running it.
Next time I’ll tell ya how really feel…
Cheers
Buster
Whoa Doggy
I would imagine they were bright enough to know that a drag strip is 1/4 mile long plus the over-run to slow down from 100+ MPH.complexintentions said: We have the benefit of news reports that give the length of the strip - are you suggesting the crew knew it was 3,800 feet?
First off, that plane was out of fuel. Secondly, saying it is drag strip is a bit of a misnomer being that it was an abandoned runway being used as a race track.Air Canada landed a 767 on a drag strip instead of the parallelling runway at Gimli Manitoba.
That kind of brings up a good point. Was the Aruba drag strip in close proximity to the airport and was it a former airport?
-
justplanecrazy
- Rank 8
- Posts: 815
- Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 1:57 pm
I guess if you guys had the background on these pilots and what they do, you wouldn't be so quick to pass judgement.
They are a 24hr medevac company with pilots suffering from 24hr jetlag. There is a 3 year burn out rate on average and they fly all over the world, talking to all different languages, performing all sorts of procedures that are foreign to domestic pilots and landing on all sorts of wierd and foreign strips. I wouldn't be surprised if they'd landed at an airport with very similar dimmensions to the drag strip in the past. Hell they've been in Africa, Iraq, Afghanistan on a regular basis.
It turns out the drag strip was not only long enough and wide enough piece of pavement to land on but also depart from. Sure they F*$&ed up big time but I won't hold my head high enough to say that after being above and below the equator and on all for quadrants of the earth in the passed 4 days, not knowing what time I should be sleeping or awake or what day it is, that I couldn't have made the same mistake myself.
Mitch you can't distance the Air Canada Kelowna incident from this. They were regular schedule local pilots flying into an airport that they are familiar with and were 200 feet away from landing on a 3,000 foot runway that they may have been able to stop on but unlike CGE, they would not be able to depart off of, 40km from the actual airport which they had landed at many times. In my mind, that's just as big of a deal as this incident, not to mention they just about took a friend of mine out of the circuit at the time.
I'm one of the guys that knows that I will make mistakes in my life, I just hope that it'll never be one as big as either of these. As a precaution, I won't join in the mud slinging.
They are a 24hr medevac company with pilots suffering from 24hr jetlag. There is a 3 year burn out rate on average and they fly all over the world, talking to all different languages, performing all sorts of procedures that are foreign to domestic pilots and landing on all sorts of wierd and foreign strips. I wouldn't be surprised if they'd landed at an airport with very similar dimmensions to the drag strip in the past. Hell they've been in Africa, Iraq, Afghanistan on a regular basis.
It turns out the drag strip was not only long enough and wide enough piece of pavement to land on but also depart from. Sure they F*$&ed up big time but I won't hold my head high enough to say that after being above and below the equator and on all for quadrants of the earth in the passed 4 days, not knowing what time I should be sleeping or awake or what day it is, that I couldn't have made the same mistake myself.
Mitch you can't distance the Air Canada Kelowna incident from this. They were regular schedule local pilots flying into an airport that they are familiar with and were 200 feet away from landing on a 3,000 foot runway that they may have been able to stop on but unlike CGE, they would not be able to depart off of, 40km from the actual airport which they had landed at many times. In my mind, that's just as big of a deal as this incident, not to mention they just about took a friend of mine out of the circuit at the time.
I'm one of the guys that knows that I will make mistakes in my life, I just hope that it'll never be one as big as either of these. As a precaution, I won't join in the mud slinging.
We have no effective screening methods to make sure pilots are sane.
— Dr. Herbert Haynes, Federal Aviation Authority.
— Dr. Herbert Haynes, Federal Aviation Authority.
-
Mitch Cronin
- Rank 8
- Posts: 914
- Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:15 am
- Location: Right beside my dog again...
Thaat's the spirrit laddie!justplanecrazy wrote:As a precaution, I won't join in the mud slinging.
Everyone who screws up while doing something we do ourselves, is exactly where we could be - if not for..... [fill in the blank] .......
Sometimes, some moments... whatever fills that blank isn't there at all, but we''re lucky... and sometimes we're not.
For that reason this business is riddled with rules and procedures and checklists and double checks and layers of redundancy in places.... Still, occasionally - and the reasons are plenty and mostly very well known - mistakes happen.
Shitting on those who make a mistake is rotten. Those who indulge in that behavior haven't been around long enough, or done enough to know it, that's all. ... but if they stick with it, they will.
I've done this job in 2 of the jets CGAA operates but prior to CGAA taking over... if fatigue is the issue then it's up to the crews to say "no, we need more rest". That is not an excuse. It's a bloody tough job but you have to be sharp or incidents like the one mentioned here will happen, continue to happen, and possibley escalate to something much more serious.justplanecrazy wrote:I guess if you guys had the background on these pilots and what they do, you wouldn't be so quick to pass judgement.
They are a 24hr medevac company with pilots suffering from 24hr jetlag.
We had a foreign controller cancel our SID on departure and vector us into rising terrain while IMC... it was up to us to control the situation and get out of it and if a crew isn't on the ball it could be deadly. The job the CGAA crews do demand proper rest... in fact proper rest is more critical in that job then any other I have done.
If fatigue isn't the issue in this case then something else went very bad on that approach.
