Resolute Bay Accident - Pilots Discussion Thread

[Lost in Saigon]

I know first-hand that the tower was operational at the time; terminal wasn't, although they were monitoring the frequency, and the Borek 99 was passed off to the tower by them. The tower cleared First Air 6560 to land twice, both when they called 10-mile final and 3-mile final. The 99 did the LOC(BC) because of the wind, but the visibility dropped and they missed, giving no option but to fly the ILS. It had absolutely nothing to do with whether the airspace was controlled.

Diadem, Please explain your first hand knowledge, and then please explain how a tower controller would allow another aircraft into the same airspace as First Air, when no one knew where First Air was. That makes absolutely no sense. The tower must have been giving advisories only. Maybe they were just practicing for when they were supposed to be officially open.

[Redneck_pilot86]

Was the tower a separate setup, or was it using the existing radios and whatnot from the CARS station? Just curious if it could be so-called tower operators using the radio even though it was still only an MF.

[onspeed]

Seriously LIS, you think the tower controller were practicing? With real airplanes, in poor wx? Maybe some fake vectors just to shake out the cobb webs?

Just as Diadem says, they were operational at the time of the accident. Although from what I understand had been using Radial and Distance information off the VOR to get position. I believe the RADAR wasn't up and running yet.

I'd think they might have assumed 6560 was in a lost comm situation when the cleared borek to land, maybe to just get them on the ground and out of the airspace. Who knows.

[Lost in Saigon]

Seriously LIS, you think the tower controller were practicing? With real airplanes, in poor wx? Maybe some fake vectors just to shake out the cobb webs?

Just as Diadem says, they were operational at the time of the accident. Although from what I understand had been using Radial and Distance information off the VOR to get position. I believe the RADAR wasn't up and running yet.

I'd think they might have assumed 6560 was in a lost comm situation when the cleared borek to land, maybe to just get them on the ground and out of the airspace. Who knows.

Seriously "onspeed",

What controller in their right mind would clear Borek for an approach when he had NO IDEA where First Air was. PLEASE EXPLAIN THAT TO ME!!!

[Diadem]

Diadem, Please explain your first hand knowledge, and then please explain how a tower controller would allow another aircraft into the same airspace as First Air, when no one knew where First Air was. That makes absolutely no sense. The tower must have been giving advisories only. Maybe they were just practicing for when they were supposed to be officially open.

I was in the airspace with them at the time. The tower's airspace only extended to 700', so they weren't responsible for the approach. Furthermore, south of the airport was complete VFR, and the 99 was on a VFR flight plan and was responsible for its own traffic separation. Everyone in the air was concerned about the possibility of a 737 flying around in the clag - we were under the assumption it had missed - with another aircraft on approach behind it, but with terminal inactive the airspace was uncontrolled. Even tower assumed they had missed and had a comm failure until the 99 was on short final and they asked the pilots to keep a look out for it.
The tower was using 122.1, the same frequency as the CARS station, but they were using their own equipment.

[onspeed]

The military had built a separate tower, right next to the runway. They were operating a terminal, ground, clearance delivery and tower frequency.

[onspeed]

LIS,

I'm assuming the controller could see the whole runway and assumed since it wasn't on the runway it was in a missed approach and since no on could raise it, it had lost coms. I'm not a military controller so I have no idea what their protocol is in such a situation with reference to why they allowed borek to land, other than maybe to get them down and not risk a mid air with a lost comm 737 who might be trying multiple approaches

Bottom line though we don't know what the military controllers protocol is in such a situation.

[Lost in Saigon]

The weather was below VFR. Borek HAD to be IFR. Only ONE aircraft is allowed into the airspace at one time in non-Radar Controlled airspace. The aircraft must have been uncontrolled. The Tower could not be controlling them.

If the tower was trying to control them there is definitely something wrong here. It is starting to look like this "Tower" may have had some contributing factor in this accident. It doesn't take much of a non-normal event to set a chain of events that can lead to a major accident.

[onspeed]

Agreed, there were definitely a few non normal events here that played into this. The military being one of them for sure.

[Diadem]

The weather was below VFR. Borek HAD to be IFR. Only ONE aircraft is allowed into the airspace at one time. The aircraft must have been uncontrolled. The Tower could not be controlling them.

If the tower was trying to control them there is definitely something wrong here. It is starting to look like this "Tower" may have had some contributing factor in this accident. It doesn't take much of a non-normal event to set a chain of events that can lead to a major accident.

The weather immediately over the airport was IFR. It was like a wall about four miles south of the airport, and beyond that, i.e. on the localizer it was clear VFR. Several aircraft were in the airspace to the south, all VFR.
As I said, the tower's airspace only extended up to 700'. Here's the NOTAM:
CLASS D RESOLUTE MTCA IS ESTABLISHED AS FLW: THE AIRSPACE WITHIN 80 NM RADIUS 744301N 945810W 700 FT AGL TO FL200. FOR OPS NANOOK. FREQ FOR OPS NANOOK: RESOLUTE TML: 228.5000 MHZ : 123.075 MHZ GLOWWORM(MIL PAR): 243.4000 MHZ : 128.850 MHZ RESOLUTE TWR: 236.5 MHZ : 122.1 MHZ RESOLUTE GND: 122.6 MHZ : 149.15 MHZ F) 700FT AGL G) FL200.
All of the aircraft were in uncontrolled airspace until they were on short final, so who would have limited the number of aircraft in the airspace? It wouldn't have mattered whether the tower was active or not; if the 737 and the 99 were above 700' the tower couldn't have told them what to do anyway.

[Lost in Saigon]

That NOTAM was not in effect on the day of the accident:

110102 CYRB RESOLUTE BAY
CYRB DAH IS AMENDED AS FLW:
CLASS D RESOLUTE CTL ZONE IS ESTABLISHED AS FLW:
THE AIRSPACE WITHIN 10 NM RADIUS 744301N 945810W
SFC TO 6000 FT MSL. FOR OPS NANOOK
1108101300 TIL 1108280100


110124 CYRB RESOLUTE BAY
CYRB DAH IS AMENDED AS FLW:
CLASS D RESOLUTE MTCA IS ESTABLISHED AS FLW:
THE AIRSPACE WITHIN 80 NM RADIUS 744301N 945810W
700 FT AGL TO FL200. FOR OPS NANOOK.
FREQ FOR OPS NANOOK:
RESOLUTE TML: 228.5000 MHZ
: 123.075 MHZ
GLOWWORM(MIL PAR): 243.4000 MHZ
: 128.850 MHZ
RESOLUTE TWR: 236.5 MHZ
: 122.1 MHZ
RESOLUTE GND: 122.6 MHZ
: 149.15 MHZ
1108221200 TIL 1108280100

[Lost in Saigon]

Agreed, there were definitely a few non normal events here that played into this. The military being one of them for sure.

The Captain on this flight had been with First Air for 15 years. He had been to Resolute Bay many times before. This should have been an ordinary, routine flight for him.

Something on Aug 20th caused him do operate differently on that day. In my opinion the military is the prime suspect now, as they were the only thing out of the ordinary that day.

[Diadem]

That NOTAM was not in effect on the day of the accident:

110102 CYRB RESOLUTE BAY
CYRB DAH IS AMENDED AS FLW:
CLASS D RESOLUTE CTL ZONE IS ESTABLISHED AS FLW:
THE AIRSPACE WITHIN 10 NM RADIUS 744301N 945810W
SFC TO 6000 FT MSL. FOR OPS NANOOK
1108101300 TIL 1108280100


110124 CYRB RESOLUTE BAY
CYRB DAH IS AMENDED AS FLW:
CLASS D RESOLUTE MTCA IS ESTABLISHED AS FLW:
THE AIRSPACE WITHIN 80 NM RADIUS 744301N 945810W
700 FT AGL TO FL200. FOR OPS NANOOK.
FREQ FOR OPS NANOOK:
RESOLUTE TML: 228.5000 MHZ
: 123.075 MHZ
GLOWWORM(MIL PAR): 243.4000 MHZ
: 128.850 MHZ
RESOLUTE TWR: 236.5 MHZ
: 122.1 MHZ
RESOLUTE GND: 122.6 MHZ
: 149.15 MHZ
1108221200 TIL 1108280100

In that case your previous comment about aircraft being cleared into the airspace is completely invalid: there were no frequencies established until the 22nd and everyone could fly around doing whatever they wanted. The tower was even less responsible for traffic separation.
I don't know why they were operating on the 20th. Maybe they got set up earlier than they anticipated and decided they wanted to activate the airspace; as someone pointed out earlier, they could amend it over the radio to supercede the NOTAM. Regardless of when the NOTAM was applicable, they were operating, and the extent of their mandate was to clear aircraft to take off and land. That's it.

[Lost in Saigon]

In that case your previous comment about aircraft being cleared into the airspace is completely invalid: there were no frequencies established until the 22nd and everyone could fly around doing whatever they wanted. The tower was even less responsible for traffic separation.

I don't know why they were operating on the 20th. Maybe they got set up earlier than they anticipated and decided they wanted to activate the airspace; as someone pointed out earlier, they could amend it over the radio to supercede the NOTAM. Regardless of when the NOTAM was applicable, they were operating, and the extent of their mandate was to clear aircraft to take off and land. That's it.

I never said anything about an aircraft being cleared into any airspace. I have always maintained that if the "Temporary Tower" was indeed talking to aircraft, there is no way they could have been controlling them.

[Diadem]

As you clarified your earlier post I concede the point. However, you must then explain why the tower would give them landing clearance. Does this not count as controlling them? And, as the tower didn't give them an approach clearance, is it not possible that they were controlling the airspace from the ground to 700', as they were scheduled to two days later? Is it not therefore plausible that they had enabled a portion of the NOTAM earlier than expected while leaving the airspace in the MTCA uncontrolled? And, as the Borek 99 didn't enter this hypothetical control zone until 10 minutes after the 737, which, had it remained flying, probably wouldn't have lingered below 700' within 10 NM of the airport for that period of time, did the tower not reasonably suspect the jet had left their airspace? Everyone, both controller and pilot, assumed the 737 had missed and climbed out for another attempt or a return to YZF. To blame the tower for not preventing a VFR aircraft from making an approach when the tower hadn't confirmed the location of an aircraft which may not have descended below 700' and entered their airspace in the first place is ridiculous. They didn't even have the authority to grant an approach clearance. All they were doing was granting take-off and landing clearance.

[Lost in Saigon]

Well, you were obviously there so you know more of the story than most of us, but I have never heard of a control tower only controlling up to 700' below uncontrolled airspace. From what I have been reading the weather was not VFR and Borek did a missed approach off the Back Course.

If an aircraft is considered NORDO, you must protect ALL the airspace around the destination for something like 30 mins. This all seems highly IRREGULAR to me.

I have a lot of questions about this "Tower". Maybe you, or someone else, can answer them......

On which day did this tower start operating?

What did they call themselves?

Were you flying into or out of CYRB on Aug 20th?

The NOTAM said nothing about a tower in operation. As aircraft approached and gave out their position and intentions on the MF, what did the tower say to them?

Was the Glideslope ever off the air or unreliable on Aug 20, or any day prior? If so, did the tower mention it?

[55+]

As you clarified your earlier post I concede the point. However, you must then explain why the tower would give them landing clearance. Does this not count as controlling them? And, as the tower didn't give them an approach clearance, is it not possible that they were controlling the airspace from the ground to 700', as they were scheduled to two days later? Is it not therefore plausible that they had enabled a portion of the NOTAM earlier than expected while leaving the airspace in the MTCA uncontrolled? And, as the Borek 99 didn't enter this hypothetical control zone until 10 minutes after the 737, which, had it remained flying, probably wouldn't have lingered below 700' within 10 NM of the airport for that period of time, did the tower not reasonably suspect the jet had left their airspace? Everyone, both controller and pilot, assumed the 737 had missed and climbed out for another attempt or a return to YZF. To blame the tower for not preventing a VFR aircraft from making an approach when the tower hadn't confirmed the location of an aircraft which may not have descended below 700' and entered their airspace in the first place is ridiculous. They didn't even have the authority to grant an approach clearance. All they were doing was granting take-off and landing clearance.

If you airline pilots are confused about classification of airspace, who can do it, what publication is referenced and what communication is appliciple during what time via what format..... one has to wonder if the FirstAir crew were facing same while flying the airplane, while setting up the approach, watching the FMS(I understand from this site, FA has Universial systems with WAAS enabled software coding), and communicating to whom ever. Just wondering that is all, nothing more...........

[onspeed]

Nobody i've spoken with has a clear understanding what was going on with the tower, in terms of what their mandate was, at the time of the accident. They seemed to have been issuing landing clearances, which i'm sure would lead people to believe they were in control of the airspace or maybe just the runway. Either not normal.

[55+]

Exactly my point, confusion. May even be a contributing factor or a mentionable item. Who knows!!!


"Was the Glideslope ever off the air or unreliable on Aug 20, or any day prior? If so, did the tower mention it?"

Not sure who monitors the alarms on the nav facilities(maybe Arctic Radio) but equipment is monitored but wouldn't be by that temp military on-site facility. If there was an issue on reliability/unserviceability, it would have been notamed

[Flying Nutcracker]

7+ pages, all this discussion, allbeit interesting angles at times, but I still don't know why this aircraft crashed...