Air Canada Accident in YHZ

[tallyho]

In the interest of exploring all the possibilities is it possible they ran out of fuel on one or both engines? There were no scorch marks on the photos I saw, they have been reported to have been in a hold for approx. 30mins. Its hard to believe this could happen but its not like it would be the first time.

[Mach7]

Hmmm, wondering if the Crew set the "bracketed" altitude as opposed to the MDA by mistake.

[Roar]

Hmmm, wondering if the Crew set the "bracketed" altitude as opposed to the MDA by mistake.

Anything is possible I suppose.
In the interest of accuracy the "bracketed" number is a height, specifically the height above TDZE, not an altitude. So to think a professional crew would set their MDA below both the airport elevation and TDZE, in my opinion is very difficult to believe.

[Strega]

In the interest of exploring all the possibilities is it possible

I think the possibility of "screwing the pooch" is higher.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

It gets confusing as far as understanding what caused these off runway arrivals here in the Socialist Republic of Canada.

March had three off runway incidents / accidents in the airline sector..so at that rate it would be thirty six a year and seeing how it takes about one to two years for the causes to be released by the TSB it becomes rather confusing to figure out why these events are occurring.

Maybe the so called " Authorities " just think we are to dense to learn anyhow?

[Liquid Charlie]

One question since Jepp is being referred to -- is air canada still producing their own plates or have they moved on -- the 580 manual at air canada was complete garbage and the information omission factor was very high -- it's been a few years since I was forced to use them and hopefully air canada has seen the light -- if not - as others will also testify to -- were just an accident waiting to happen --

[Meatservo]

This might seem like a stupid, naive question, but with respect to approach plates, why aren't we all just using the NavCanada ones at Canadian airports? They seem OK to me. Is it just to reduce the number of charts carried onboard? It's probably just me: I know how to read the Jeppesen charts of course, but even so I always feel vaguely bewildered when I look at them for some reason. I think it's the strange fonts they use.

[bob99]

This might seem like a stupid, naive question, but with respect to approach plates, why aren't we all just using the NavCanada ones at Canadian airports? They seem OK to me. Is it just to reduce the number of charts carried onboard? It's probably just me: I know how to read the Jeppesen charts of course, but even so I always feel vaguely bewildered when I look at them for some reason. I think it's the strange fonts they use.

If you only fly to Canadian airports that's fine, but I don't believe NavCanada makes charts for the rest of the world. What's the point in using those for just Canadian airports when you're still using Jepps for everywhere else?

[linecrew]

One question since Jepp is being referred to -- is air canada still producing their own plates or have they moved on -- the 580 manual at air canada was complete garbage and the information omission factor was very high -- it's been a few years since I was forced to use them and hopefully air canada has seen the light -- if not - as others will also testify to -- were just an accident waiting to happen --

Their print shop closed a number of years ago when they switched to Jeppesen.

[stefan_777]

Nobody mentioned the chemtrail switch being left on.

It's possible the chemtrail spray could have reduced visibilty on final.

Standard operating procedures call for the disarm spray setting at the FAF.

Notify the lawyers.

[BTD]

Nobody mentioned the chemtrail switch being left on.

It's possible the chemtrail spray could have reduced visibilty on final.

Standard operating procedures call for the disarm spray setting at the FAF.

Notify the lawyers.

Shh.. Don't tell.

Hmmm, wondering if the Crew set the "bracketed" altitude as opposed to the MDA by mistake.

If this were the case they wouldn't have landed short. Flying the FPA method will give you a single profile to a mda +50 Decision Altitude. From that point continuing the FPA to the ground should have you hit the runway. Similar to following a g/s right to the ground. In theory you should hit be 1000 feet down the runway when you contact it.

[Illya Kuryakin]

I'm still confused as to why the A320 doesn't have the same vertical nav (GS) capability as my mid '70's King Air going into YPM? Oh, I know the reasons. They just don't make sense. Really.
Illya

Guess I should ask.....is there an RNAV approach for this runway?

[55+]

I'm still confused as to why the A320 doesn't have the same vertical nav (GS) capability as my mid '70's King Air going into YPM? Oh, I know the reasons. They just don't make sense. Really.
Illya

Guess I should ask.....is there an RNAV approach for this runway?

Yes there is RNAV (GNSS) RW05. There is a Category non-precision LNAV calculated to a specific MDA and a precision WAAS(LPV) calculated to a specific DA.

[Liquid Charlie]

I'm still confused as to why the A320 doesn't have the same vertical nav (GS) capability as my mid '70's King Air going into YPM? Oh, I know the reasons. They just don't make sense. Really.
Illya

How long have you had the vertical profile -- we wondered the same thing but I'll measure it was long before there was "creep" into 703/704 aircraft - when 7F first started installing Universals about 13 years ago we thought it was PFM even with a bastardized analogue interface and for night operations onto the ice -- damn -- having centre line and decent profile took a lot of the pucker factor out -- even looking back further pre GPS we always laughed at AC going airways (domesically) when we went direct. Bean counters usually have the last word which has created much grief and despair and likely won't change much.

[Illya Kuryakin]

Well LC, I'm just referring to GS information from an RNAV approach. But, we've had it for a good while. I often don't even bother with the ILS, but rather do the RNAV. I find it strange that the national flag airline has more basic approach capabilities than we do. I mean, if push came to shove (0,0 and no fuel left to miss) you could chop power, select GA, and the silly thing would put you on centreline. You'd have some 'splainen to do though.
Illya

[Liquid Charlie]

Well LC, I'm just referring to GS information from an RNAV approach

--

I know what you mean -- I was just wondering how long your aircraft have been equipped that way - like I said we had it since about 2002 or 2003 when 7F started retrofitting to the Universals - first units were not WAAS but had GS capabilities as well GS - now having said that air canada had had FMS but no GPS channel. 4 years ago I never saw any of the 703/704 carriers with it but it seems to be common now --
The universals were cool because of their VFR function - which allowed you to build an approach in 15 seconds to any airport in the data base with full approach functions -- of course this was just for reference in VFR wx --

How time marches on -- we actually have pilots flying now that started flying after the introduction of GPS --

[Jean-Pierre]

Why'd 7F crash into a hill then?

[Illya Kuryakin]

Why'd 7F crash into a hill then?

A bit off topic, no?
Illya

[Meatservo]

Well LC, I'm just referring to GS information from an RNAV approach

--

I know what you mean -- I was just wondering how long your aircraft have been equipped that way - like I said we had it since about 2002 or 2003 when 7F started retrofitting to the Universals - first units were not WAAS but had GS capabilities as well GS - now having said that air canada had had FMS but no GPS channel. 4 years ago I never saw any of the 703/704 carriers with it but it seems to be common now --
The universals were cool because of their VFR function - which allowed you to build an approach in 15 seconds to any airport in the data base with full approach functions -- of course this was just for reference in VFR wx --

How time marches on -- we actually have pilots flying now that started flying after the introduction of GPS --

We actually have pilots flying now who were BORN after the introduction of GPS.

[Liquid Charlie]

Why'd 7F crash into a hill then?

--- REALLY!!! -- read the report and then PM me if you can't understand it -- just when one thinks they have seen just about everything -- the lack of forethought and knowledge just amazes me sometimes -- and an ALPA brother as well -- WTF

[CpnCrunch]

Why'd 7F crash into a hill then?

--- REALLY!!! -- read the report and then PM me if you can't understand it -- just when one thinks they have seen just about everything -- the lack of forethought and knowledge just amazes me sometimes -- and an ALPA brother as well -- WTF

I think he was pointing out that both aircraft had old equipment. Having a decent GPS and TAWS would almost certainly have prevented both accidents.

[Meatservo]

The lack thereof wasn't the cause in either case either however. A boat doesn't sink because its hull isn't covered in enough patches. It sinks because there's a hole in it.

[CpnCrunch]

The lack thereof wasn't the cause in either case either however. A boat doesn't sink because its hull isn't covered in enough patches. It sinks because there's a hole in it.

Of course, but it still would have (almost certainly) prevented both accidents. In your analogy it's more like saying "boat captains will not be provided with patches as it costs too much and shouldn't be necessary. In the event of a puncture you should stick stick finger in the hole and continue to destination".

[Meatservo]

Well I agree, but as well as being provided with patches, it's important to understand where all the holes are coming from.

I've made an observation, I think, about advanced technology. I feel that when people are able to do without it, then when it is working it works with them to enhance their abilities. But when it fails, they still operate at an acceptable level of safety. When people rely on the technology so much that they NEED it in order to operate at an acceptable level of safety, then we find ourselves in a world where ever-increasing technological sophistication is required to continuously shore-up a diminishing level of human performance.

It's hard to put this into words. I think about when they first invented GPS for example. Pilots were for the most part pretty good navigators at that point. When GPS appeared, it was able to hone those navigating abilities to a very fine edge. However, it's been around so long now, that there are people who only manage to maintain an acceptable level of safety and situational awareness because the technology is working. This to me seems less safe somehow.

I'm not saying I don't think the latest aids should be installed in aircraft. That would be stupid. What I am saying is that when a plane is not where it is supposed to be due to a pilot's lack of ability to navigate traditionally, the reason that happened is the pilot's lack of ability. Obviously as skills diminish, we keep inventing stuff to shore up the safety level and even keep it slightly increasing. But imagine what we would achieve if the skills were still there?

We'd have all these great patches AND no holes in the boat. Sorry for the corny ending.

[Jean-Pierre]

The lack thereof wasn't the cause in either case either however. A boat doesn't sink because its hull isn't covered in enough patches. It sinks because there's a hole in it.

Yes this was my intent. I meant no disrespect to the crew of either accident. I just mean all the equipment in the world won't prevent mistake completely.